|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2020, 04:37:17 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: Gustaf, Hash, Where is my Freistaat Preußen avatar?)
  United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 70 Print
Author Topic: United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019  (Read 85605 times)
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,166
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1475 on: December 11, 2019, 09:17:21 am »

Seeing Skinner go down would be a Portillo moment though.

The thing about that was that Portillo was a high profile cabinet minister, widely understood to be on the cusp of launching a leadership bid. He was also thought to be safe enough, that area being very different twenty two years ago (yes we're old) to what it is like today.

Whereas the potential loss of Bolsover has been heavily trailed across the media for months. And, bluntly, while Skinner used to be one of Labour's highest profile backbenchers, on the telly all the time, these days he is not. I suspect that a lot of people would be surprised to find he was still around and still running for election.

But in the end this sort of thing does not matter. Michael Portillo is, I gather, doing fine now. So is Ed Balls.

Agreed. If there's going to be a Portillo moment in this election the likely candidates for it are Dominic Raab, Ian Duncan Smith, or maybe Steve Baker. If a Labour landslide was on the offer Jacob Rees-Mogg might be on that list.

Of course, the ultimate candidate would be Boris Johnson himself. If he lost his seat I think we'd have to rename the whole idea as the 'Boris Moment' or something.
Logged
Cassius
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,922


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1476 on: December 11, 2019, 09:28:35 am »

How can you hide in a fridge, I tried when I was a 5 year old and failed.

It’s a milk delivery depot - the fridge will be massive.
Logged
bigic
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 387
Serbia and Montenegro
Political Matrix
E: 2.32, S: -7.30


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1477 on: December 11, 2019, 09:41:23 am »

If a Labour landslide was on the offer Jacob Rees-Mogg might be on that list.

I think the more likely challengers to JRM are the Lib Dems, considering the constituency polls.
Logged
DaWN
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,109
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1478 on: December 11, 2019, 09:55:54 am »

I find that people frequently misunderstand what a Portillo moment is. It isn't just 'someone high profile losing their seat' - there were plenty of those in 1997 and in every election since.

There are two elements to it - first it needs to be some so high profile that their absence from parliament fundamentally shifts the future of their party. Portillo losing his seat meant he couldn't run for the leadership of the Tory party for instance. Second, it needs to be completely unexpected. Saying 'I think x is a candidate for a Portillo moment' means that x cannot be a Portillo moment, because you expect it as a possibility. The real Portillo moment would be y losing their seat that nobody thought was even remotely likely to flip.

Therefore, Boris or Raab can't be Portillo moments this election because it's now fairly common knowledge their seats are at least somewhat vulnerable. If Corbyn or Patel lost, then that would be a Portillo moment. Of course, neither of them would lose in a trillion years, but you get the point...
Logged
urutzizu
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 731
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1479 on: December 11, 2019, 10:07:34 am »
« Edited: December 11, 2019, 10:14:38 am by urutzizu »



The Last Opinium Poll before the 2017 election (Compared to Results):
Con: 43% (43%)
Lab: 36% (41%)
Lib:    8%  (8%)
UKIP: 5%  (2%)




Junk pollster, but was 41(Lab)-39(Cons) last Time
Logged
Penn_Quaker_Girl
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,632
India


Political Matrix
E: 0.12, S: 0.10

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1480 on: December 11, 2019, 10:22:09 am »

I find that people frequently misunderstand what a Portillo moment is. It isn't just 'someone high profile losing their seat' - there were plenty of those in 1997 and in every election since.

There are two elements to it - first it needs to be some so high profile that their absence from parliament fundamentally shifts the future of their party. Portillo losing his seat meant he couldn't run for the leadership of the Tory party for instance. Second, it needs to be completely unexpected. Saying 'I think x is a candidate for a Portillo moment' means that x cannot be a Portillo moment, because you expect it as a possibility. The real Portillo moment would be y losing their seat that nobody thought was even remotely likely to flip.

Therefore, Boris or Raab can't be Portillo moments this election because it's now fairly common knowledge their seats are at least somewhat vulnerable. If Corbyn or Patel lost, then that would be a Portillo moment. Of course, neither of them would lose in a trillion years, but you get the point...

Probably the closest recent examples we've had here in the States came from the 2018 midterms.  Though the Democrats were expected to flip the House, they also picked up a few seats that were considered pretty safely Republican.  To me, the biggest surprise of the night was Kendra Horn (OK-05), a Democrat who won in an R+10 district 50.7-49.3.  The poll taken closest to election night predicted that incumbent Steve Russell (R) would win by twelve points. 

Mind you, it doesn't necessarily qualify in full as this flip didn't change the political landscape.
Logged
Babeuf
Rookie
**
Posts: 249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1481 on: December 11, 2019, 10:49:03 am »

I find that people frequently misunderstand what a Portillo moment is. It isn't just 'someone high profile losing their seat' - there were plenty of those in 1997 and in every election since.

There are two elements to it - first it needs to be some so high profile that their absence from parliament fundamentally shifts the future of their party. Portillo losing his seat meant he couldn't run for the leadership of the Tory party for instance. Second, it needs to be completely unexpected. Saying 'I think x is a candidate for a Portillo moment' means that x cannot be a Portillo moment, because you expect it as a possibility. The real Portillo moment would be y losing their seat that nobody thought was even remotely likely to flip.

Therefore, Boris or Raab can't be Portillo moments this election because it's now fairly common knowledge their seats are at least somewhat vulnerable. If Corbyn or Patel lost, then that would be a Portillo moment. Of course, neither of them would lose in a trillion years, but you get the point...

Probably the closest recent examples we've had here in the States came from the 2018 midterms.  Though the Democrats were expected to flip the House, they also picked up a few seats that were considered pretty safely Republican.  To me, the biggest surprise of the night was Kendra Horn (OK-05), a Democrat who won in an R+10 district 50.7-49.3.  The poll taken closest to election night predicted that incumbent Steve Russell (R) would win by twelve points.  

Mind you, it doesn't necessarily qualify in full as this flip didn't change the political landscape.
Eric Cantor losing his primary when he was next in line to be Speaker after Boehner seems closer. Very few saw it coming and it impacted the House leadership. It wasn't during a national election though, so that might disqualify it.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,977


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1482 on: December 11, 2019, 11:16:01 am »



Okay, this is the final YouGov MRP, separated into their Safe/Likely/lean/Toss statistical rating categories. I'll analyze it a bit, since there  is a good amount of data hiding behind the topline.



Compared to the previous YouGov MRP poll, the Tories lost net 11 seats north of Coventry to Labour. However, that topline obscures a nastier number. All 11 still remain close, and the algorithm considers them Lean or Tossups. On labours side of the equation though, 8 seats slid from Likely/Lean/Toss labour significantly towards the tories, and a good number more moved towards team blue outside of the competitive band. This is compared to 5 seats which left the battlefield, though nearly all were urban (like Wirral South) and probably never should have been in the battlefield. Only High peak is a notable movement in labours favor off the field of play. In essence, the potential Tory gains in the north got wider and more accessible.



it's the south and London where things moved in a less favorable fashion for the Conservatives. A whole lot of seats in the commuter shires moved from safe to likely, and plenty of targeted seats got more marginal. it's very well possible that YouGov are underselling potential Tory losses in the South because of how every model misses the Lib-Dems and their 'key targets' campaign style. The last thing I have to add is that YouGov has no demographic variable for Jews even in the large MRP, the community is too small, so just ignore all three Barnet seats. They got 2/3 Barnet's wrong last time in 2017, so this is a repeated offence that really isn't their fault.



I have already mentioned mostly how YouGov has no idea what is going on in Scotland, but I will just summarize it here. There is only one safe seat for any party in the 59, and half are competitive. Last time, nearly half of YouGov's miss-called seats were in Scotland. No model has any idea what is going on because we only have one years worth of party loyalty to work with, it's a 3 or 4 party system, and tactical voting is a realistic thing. Even the BBC exit poll made some LOL tier predictions up here because of how uncertain this whole thing is.



Wales deserves mentioning because of conflicting data sources. On one hand, we have the YouGov Welsh barometer giving us a Lab+3 result. On the other hand the MRP has Lab+9 for their welsh subsample. Both the poll and the model were very accurate in 2017 so we are left with a confusing picture. One thing that is clear is that five northern welsh seats (Aberconwy, Dely, Clwyd S, Vale of Clywd, Wrexham) all seem to be moving as one unit. Oh, and who knows whats going on in Ynys Mon, every model under the sun historically fails to get enough targeted data on PC to accurately project their Westminster vote.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,977


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1483 on: December 11, 2019, 11:29:46 am »



YouGov says this seat is a Lab-tilting tossup, this poll suggests Con-tilting. Either way, tossup.
Logged
Baki
Rookie
**
Posts: 179
Croatia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1484 on: December 11, 2019, 11:38:30 am »

Regarding this poll..



The Last Opinium Poll before the 2017 election (Compared to Results):
Con: 43% (43%)
Lab: 36% (41%)
Lib:    8%  (8%)
UKIP: 5%  (2%)


...from the Independent

Quote
Adam Drummond, head of political polling at Opinium, said:
While 9 per cent of voters are still undecided, a disproportionate share of this group are people who voted Labour in 2017 and Leave in 2016. The size (or existence) of any Conservative majority runs through this late-deciding group so what they do tomorrow will be crucial.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,141
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1485 on: December 11, 2019, 12:16:30 pm »

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-11/johnson-s-poll-gamble-just-got-a-199-million-vote-of-confidence

"Boris Johnson’s Poll Gamble Just Got a $199 Million Vote of Confidence"

Logged
vileplume
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 269
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1486 on: December 11, 2019, 12:38:34 pm »

I find that people frequently misunderstand what a Portillo moment is. It isn't just 'someone high profile losing their seat' - there were plenty of those in 1997 and in every election since.

There are two elements to it - first it needs to be some so high profile that their absence from parliament fundamentally shifts the future of their party. Portillo losing his seat meant he couldn't run for the leadership of the Tory party for instance. Second, it needs to be completely unexpected. Saying 'I think x is a candidate for a Portillo moment' means that x cannot be a Portillo moment, because you expect it as a possibility. The real Portillo moment would be y losing their seat that nobody thought was even remotely likely to flip.

Therefore, Boris or Raab can't be Portillo moments this election because it's now fairly common knowledge their seats are at least somewhat vulnerable. If Corbyn or Patel lost, then that would be a Portillo moment. Of course, neither of them would lose in a trillion years, but you get the point...

Angela Rayner going down in Ashton-under-Lyne would be the best example of a 'Portillo moment' should it happen: up and coming shadow cabinet minister and potential future leader, strongly disliked by her political opponents, who has a seat considered safe (though not utterly bombproof like Corbyn's). Rayner's current majority of 28.4% is pretty similar to Portillo's '92 majority of 31.8% as well.

There has also been some (probably false) murmurs that Labour is deeply unhappy with what they're seeing in the Ashton constituency and YouGov only has her winning by 12%. People forget that in the run up to '97 there was a poll in the Observer only showing Portillo winning Enfield Southgate by 3%, so the warning signs were there but most people just chose to ignore them. This is similar to the situation with Rayner as there has been some (probably not credible) reports that she could be in trouble that most people (including me) are choosing to dismiss.

In all likelihood she will hold the seat easily but if somehow she manages to lose, it would definitely be the next 'Portillio moment'.
Logged
mileslunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,765
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1487 on: December 11, 2019, 12:45:42 pm »

I find that people frequently misunderstand what a Portillo moment is. It isn't just 'someone high profile losing their seat' - there were plenty of those in 1997 and in every election since.

There are two elements to it - first it needs to be some so high profile that their absence from parliament fundamentally shifts the future of their party. Portillo losing his seat meant he couldn't run for the leadership of the Tory party for instance. Second, it needs to be completely unexpected. Saying 'I think x is a candidate for a Portillo moment' means that x cannot be a Portillo moment, because you expect it as a possibility. The real Portillo moment would be y losing their seat that nobody thought was even remotely likely to flip.

Therefore, Boris or Raab can't be Portillo moments this election because it's now fairly common knowledge their seats are at least somewhat vulnerable. If Corbyn or Patel lost, then that would be a Portillo moment. Of course, neither of them would lose in a trillion years, but you get the point...

Angela Rayner going down in Ashton-under-Lyne would be the best example of a 'Portillo moment' should it happen: up and coming shadow cabinet minister and potential future leader, strongly disliked by her political opponents, who has a seat considered safe (though not utterly bombproof like Corbyn's). Rayner's current majority of 28.4% is pretty similar to Portillo's '92 majority of 31.8% as well.

There has also been some (probably false) murmurs that Labour is deeply unhappy with what they're seeing in the Ashton constituency and YouGov only has her winning by 12%. People forget that in the run up to '97 there was a poll in the Observer only showing Portillo winning Enfield Southgate by 3%, so the warning signs were there but most people just chose to ignore them. This is similar to the situation with Rayner as there has been some (probably not credible) reports that she could be in trouble that most people (including me) are choosing to dismiss.

In all likelihood she will hold the seat easily but if somehow she manages to lose, it would definitely be the next 'Portillio moment'.

Another one would be Laura Pidcock losing her seat in Northwest Durham.  She represents the hard left of the party and some have tipped her as a successor.  Her seat also part of the Red wall, but went leave heavily in Brexit and she won by 18 points in 2017 so not an insurmountable obstacle to overcome.  MRP only gives her a 5 point lead.

Also Dennis Skinner losing while no surprise should get is mention as he is a legend for the party, yet MRP suggests he is tipped to lose his seat of Bolsover but still close.  Interestingly enough although not running, Kenneth Clarke's seat of Rushcliffe only shows Tories 10 only ten points ahead, but that is a whole different talking point, but wouldn't be surprised if Labour wins that one in 2024.
Logged
rob in cal
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,847
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1488 on: December 11, 2019, 12:54:32 pm »

  I've been having trouble opening the files on some of the polls, so my question is, what are the "already voted" numbers looking like, or do British firms even post that?
Logged
BernieBros hate women. Hate democrats. Hate USA
MissScarlett
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 552


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1489 on: December 11, 2019, 01:22:08 pm »

So apparently if Boris Johnson loses Uxbridge tomorrow night, the Tories will give him a peerage and put him in the unelected House of Lords (similar to senate) so he carry on being Prime Minister.

Iain Duncan Smith, Dominic Raab and Theresa De Villere giving same assurances but timing different.

On Twitter (melt down) the BBCs chief political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg has broken election laws and been referred to the police by the electoral commission for disclosing postal vote counts in live tv. (Big no-no). Guardian reporting they believe ‘bridges burnt for her to continue’ and she has a job lined up in Tory CCHQ/Boris government.
Logged
BernieBros hate women. Hate democrats. Hate USA
MissScarlett
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 552


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1490 on: December 11, 2019, 01:28:00 pm »

With regards to races, speaker could lose in Chorley to a man who changed his name to ‘mark Brexit smith’.

Foreign secretary - Dominic Raab - is in deep trouble in affluent but remain Surrey. (Actor Hugh Grant campaigning for Liberal Democrat’s)

Liberal Democrat’s costing Labor party 25 seats in wales, midlands and north. If liberals get their deposits (5%) in conservative-labor marginals then that’s the difference between a Tory government and a hung parliament. So the liberals are ensuring Brexit not stopping it.
Logged
Kyng
Rookie
**
Posts: 117
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1491 on: December 11, 2019, 01:48:54 pm »

Liberal Democrat’s costing Labor party 25 seats in wales, midlands and north. If liberals get their deposits (5%) in conservative-labor marginals then that’s the difference between a Tory government and a hung parliament. So the liberals are ensuring Brexit not stopping it.

Not necessarily. The only people voting Lib Dem in constituencies like that will be:

1) Their most devoted and die-hard supporters, who are unwilling to vote tactically for the "lesser of two evils", and;
2) At the opposite end of the spectrum, protest-voters who don't like the two main parties.

If the Lib Dems weren't running, then I expect more than half of the people in group #1 would hold their noses for Labour - but a minority would instead opt for the Tories. As for group #2 (which I suspect would be larger than group #1), most of those people simply wouldn't vote (or they'd just vote for a different minor candidate).

Sure, the Tories will win or hold a few extra constituencies thanks to Lab/Lib vote-splitting, but I suspect you'll be able to count the number on one hand.
Logged
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,167
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1492 on: December 11, 2019, 01:57:12 pm »
« Edited: December 11, 2019, 05:34:19 pm by bore »

I don't know how many people here still know who I am, but for those who do and care what I think this is what I think we’ve seen and learnt over the course of the campaign.

I have never been a prolific poster - if I have nothing to say I would rather do that in no words than in many - but I have been even less so during this election. This is partially because I hate the twitter motto of “The first take, right or wrong”. We have seen in 2015, 2016 and 2017 that polls, vox pops and focus groups are basically worthless, only election results tell us the truth. So it is a sign of a deformed intellect to make sweeping statements, for instance, about the electoral map being redrawn. We are not in a hurry, we will know for sure in a few short hours. Analysis can only be done when you have something to analyse, and for all the sound and fury in a campaign itself there is not much worth analysing.

The other reason for silence, though, is more personal. In football a common grenade to launch at opposition fans is “You only sing when you’re winning”. The virtuous fan is supposed to remain in the ground, no matter how badly his team are being thumped. Whether that is true virtue in sport is one thing, but it is clearly not in politics. If the party you dislike are winning, it’s not virtuous to watch their celebrations, its masochistic. And this campaign, even if the good guys win in the end, has been nothing but a triumph for everything I hate, from the always evil tories to the shrill incompetence of the lib dems, the hate of the print media to the craven cowardice of the BBC.

Nevertheless, inevitably, I post on this website, I live in Britain, I have been followed enough to know what’s going on. I am expecting, though only a fool would predict, a healthy tory majority. I will though, taking my own advice, save a post mortem on labour’s campaign and corbynism until we know that the patient is dead. The one thing I would say is you can not underestimate the political ramifications of a tory win on the demographic which most of us are a part of: the young, educated and on the left. We have seen, throughout this campaign, just as we did in 2017, that these people are exceptionally motivated- we had, for instance, 700 canvassers at one time in Putney. There was an expectation in the aftermath of 2017 that it was a turning point, in the next election that Labour would sweep in to power, while not perhaps in Westminster arithmetic, in the sense of momentum, the tories had consigned themselves to the past in 2017. Something was happening but the establishment did not know what it was. If, after all that, after all the chaos of the last two years, the tories win more seats then it will be a seismic event. Some will react by plowing on, confident in the actuaries eventual victory, some will abandon politics, some will decide the time has come for factional infighting and some will, having seen the BES figures and the other crosstabs, declare war on the boomers. I do not know what combination of these approaches will fill this vacuum but a look at the Democratic presidential primary does not give me much hope that we will make the right call.

If, when the clock does strike 10 though, the exit poll delivers a grim sentence, I’d like to offer two small crumbs of hope. Firstly, the tory campaign - if campaign is the right word given they spent more time avoiding than interacting with voters - when not robotically repeating Get Brexit Done, was an implicit rebuke of their policies of the last 9 years. That is not to say that the spending they propose on the NHS or on schools or the justice system is in anyway adequate, and obviously they can not be trusted even to do that. But it is a recognition on their part that Britain is in a terrible state, and that the electorate will not tolerate it. The left should take heart from the fact that for all their dirty tricks and bad intentions, the right wing can only row the state back so far. The next Labour government can build services that the tories can not touch, and that is a powerful motivator.

The other straw worth clutching to, redolent as it is of bad atlas takes, but true nonetheless, is that this is not an election that will produce an enduring tory government. Boris Johnson is phenomenally unpopular, kept in the race by the fact Corbyn is even more phenomenally unpopular, and he will not become more likeable. His central slogan is a lie which will be found out. His government will try, but it will fail, to get Brexit done, because Brexit will never be done, that is how trade negotiations work. It will not do anything close to enough to rebuild the crumbling public realm, its standard bearers will, whenever they are seen, make the publics skin crawl. It has nothing to offer. It would be eviscerated in a 2024 election. This future destruction, I should make clear, is not worth the present human misery that will occur if they are re-elected, but it is something to remember as you watch them gloat. Whatever happens tomorrow, sometime soon The Day Will Come.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,089
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1493 on: December 11, 2019, 02:15:21 pm »

Can someone explain why Johnson is specifically avoiding interviews with high profile journos like Neil and Piers Morgan and why exactly its so important for him not to be "exposed"? Is he that much of a ticking time bomb or is there some sort of grudge between him and the fourth estate (that he's a part of himself)?

I'm trying to understand why it generates so much media attention in itself.

Because when he does do interviews, he tends to make gaffes or repeat himself a lot.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,977


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1494 on: December 11, 2019, 02:21:14 pm »



Last minute poll shows no overall change.
Logged
BernieBros hate women. Hate democrats. Hate USA
MissScarlett
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 552


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1495 on: December 11, 2019, 02:27:00 pm »

How would it go down in the uk if Boris lost Uxbridge and was put in the House of Lords to remain prime minister.

Nothing the uk public can do about it but it would stink no?
Logged
urutzizu
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 731
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1496 on: December 11, 2019, 02:45:41 pm »

How would it go down in the uk if Boris lost Uxbridge and was put in the House of Lords to remain prime minister.

Nothing the uk public can do about it but it would stink no?

Not sure where those allegations about Boris going to the Lords came from, but would be much easier and more likely in my opinion to just have a Tory MP in a safe seat go to the Chiltern Hundreds (i.e. Resign) and let Boris get in to the Commons through a By-election. Alex Douglas-Hume is the only recent precedent for this, and that was the course of action.  

In other news: Last BMG Poll: 41(-)/32(-)/14(-)/4(-)/3(-1)
Logged
Gary J
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 274
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1497 on: December 11, 2019, 02:47:38 pm »

So apparently if Boris Johnson loses Uxbridge tomorrow night, the Tories will give him a peerage and put him in the unelected House of Lords (similar to senate) so he carry on being Prime Minister.

Iain Duncan Smith, Dominic Raab and Theresa De Villere giving same assurances but timing different.

On Twitter (melt down) the BBCs chief political correspondent Laura Kuenssberg has broken election laws and been referred to the police by the electoral commission for disclosing postal vote counts in live tv. (Big no-no). Guardian reporting they believe ‘bridges burnt for her to continue’ and she has a job lined up in Tory CCHQ/Boris government.

If I expressed myself confusingly, in my previous post about what will happen if Johnson loses his seat, I apologise. The plan would not be to give Johnson a peerage. It is for someone else to be made a peer, to free up a House of Commons seat to elect Johnson in a by-election.

It has generally been accepted, since Lord Curzon failed to be appointed Prime Minister in 1923, that only in the most exceptional circumstances would there be a Prime Minister in the House of Lords. Lord Halifax was considered as a possible replacement for Chamberlain in 1940, but as Churchill did not support him the idea was dropped. Lord Home, whose case I mentioned in the previous post, was only available to become Prime Minister because the ability to renounce hereditary peerages had recently been introduced.
Logged
bronz4141
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,544
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1498 on: December 11, 2019, 02:53:49 pm »

Some fear that the Tories will destroy the UK.......
Logged
President Pericles
Pericles
Atlas Politician
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,097

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1499 on: December 11, 2019, 03:14:37 pm »

Some fear that the Tories will destroy the UK.......

Just in terms of the union, Boris' deal means Northern Ireland is economically separate from the rest of the UK, with trade between the two being subject to custom checks and in some cases higher tariffs, leading to higher prices in Northern Ireland than the rest of the UK and damaging the region's economy. The fear of the unionists there is that this could lead to a political separation beginning to form and support increasing for Northern Ireland leaving the UK and joining the Republic of Ireland (which polls show is already starting to happen). There is also the risk that Boris' hard Brexit increases support for Scottish independence (currently polls show independence is just a few points behind in the polls). Scotland voted by 62% to remain in the EU, and one of the key points in the previous independence referendum was that independence would mean losing EU membership, while now independence means potentially gaining EU membership. That said, the complications of Brexit could  make a hugely more complicated political and economic separation look unattractive to Scots. A good result for the SNP would encourage them to pursue independence, though Boris has taken a hard line on independence, while a good result for the Tories could mean an underperformance for the SNP and would discourage them from pursuing independence in the near future. Still, Scottish independence's prospects, either in the short-term or long-term, of winning an eventual referendum would be higher if the Tories win the election than if a Labour government is formed, especially if a second referendum results in the UK remaining in the EU. I think the UK probably remains intact in the near future, but the risks to the union, especially in the long-term, will be higher if the Tories are re-elected.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 70 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines