UK General Election -

[RAyMO]

41 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

Not entirely, it still stands under the Lisbon Treaty Article 50 the default position is we leave with No-Deal if no deal can be agreed by 31st January. the only thing which prevented this happening to date was the old Parliament, will the new parliament act in the same fashion?  lets remember, Boris's deal has to be put before the new parliament. if its rejected its likely those same MP's would vote against any further extension which means Leaving on the 31st Jan on WTO.

yes that is possible.

[L.A.T.1961]

3 hours ago, stevewinn said:

General election. - no wonder all the promises being made cannot be delivered once elected. every single Labour policy i've heard this morning on the radio is undeliverable as they break the fiscal rules set by Brussels. why is the BBC not highlighted this?

There is no mention of spending our former EU contributions from any party leading me to believe that the  LibLabCon will ALWAYS find an excuse to avoid leaving the constraints of the EU.

The best we can hope for is the Tories to win the election by being the largest party without a majority and the Brexit party to do something never done in British politics and come from nowhere and win 15 seats. so holding the govts feet to the fire and keeping the only true brexit option of WTO on the table.

Boris's deal has us leaving but tied to the EU, and we must not forget Brois deal means a trade deal is going to take a further 3 years as stated by Barnier. we've seen what the last three years have been like and it will be more of the same when it comes to a trade deal.

ultimately over the decades both Labour and Tory govts huff and puff over the EU for public consumption but in the end they've wilted to the EU. remember Cameron when the EU demanded an extra £2.1bn because our economy was doing well. he came out all red faced, were not paying it and then quietly paid it in two instalments,.

We've been done ladies and gentlemen, LibLabCon have ultimately conspired together to get the outcome the lot of them always wanted, namely, get WTO true Brexit off the table. -  So he we are faced with a general election and where is WTO??????? 

The UK over the last Three years and the next Three years will have paid the EU. £156Bn and what for. absolute joke, imagine what could have been done here at home. better funding for the NHS, police, Schools,  etc... but feck it, did we really need it to spend it at home? i mean empire building doesn't come cheap and EU members need infrastructure building and improving. - i mean whats the point in building factories on cheap land in Slovakia with back handers and brown envelopes when the goods produced will have trouble flowing back to the UK along dirt tracks. no, lets build new smooth roads so the goods can flow back to us with ease. its a good deal ladies and gentlemen. we export our jobs to them at the expense of British workers and then help them sell what was once produced here back to us. and in the meantime as British Jobs are lost we take masses of Europe's unskilled workers. its a win win for the UK im sure people will agree, we exchange a highly paid factory worker for a toilet cleaner. winner winner chicken dinner.

 

I have a slightly different view. The backstop was the big problem and it has now gone. The backstop allowed the EU to keep UK tied almost indefinitely to Brussels and UK had no independent mechanism to get out. 

This would have been used, as Macron pointed out at the time, to force every concession from UK that Brussels could think of in the future trade deal. This would have been brino.

All ties included in the current WA are time limited, Nigel has also acknowledged this. His argument is that these ties could go on for as long as it takes to get an FTA.

So it is important for a government to be elected with a big enough majority to arrange a new FTA quickly and, if necessary, to say no FTA is better than a bad FTA.

Given how seriously folks took Boris's threat to leave without a withdrawal deal I don't think we will see the same approach from Brussels with FTA negotiations, as happened with the May lead WA negotiations, if Boris is elected with a decent majority? 

The letter of intent on a future FTA is not legally binding and although it talks of close cooperation this is open to interpretation and this is well understood on both sides of the channel.

With the backstop gone it resets the negotiations and puts all chips back on the table, if EU wants licensed access to UK territorial waters for some fishing they will have to give something back, with the backstop in play Brussels could have kept the old fishing arrangement without reciprocal cost. 

How the EU originally planed to use the backstop - 

"warning came from the French President Emmanuel Macron, who suggested that if the UK was unwilling to compromise in negotiations on fishing, which would need to make rapid progress, then talks on a wider trade deal would be slow. The president implied (threatened) that without sufficient progress on trade, the backstop plan to avoid a hard border in Ireland would have to be implemented, including a temporary customs union for the whole of the UK." 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46336962 

The future FTA is the important factor and the EU have now lost their backstop leverage and are also faced, not with a remainer T May, but potentially Boris. 

[RAyMO]

4 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

The backstop was the big problem and it has now gone.

Try telling that to the DUP and their supporters in N Ireland.

Boris was here the other  day and the general consensus was that he doesn't understand his own deal or he was lying about its implications for NI.

So to the Unionists the NI only backstop was re-introduced and to make matters worse, from their perspective, control over it was handed to the nationalists (sinn Fein / SDLP) by insisting on a simple majority vote to determine whether or not it stays.

In their view they are being forced into economic unity with the Republic of Ireland with the keys on getting rid of that policy being given to those that want a fully United Ireland.

The backstop was not removed - rather the EU's original plan - which May didn't bring to the Commons because of the DUP objections was re-introduced.

But the fact that people in England think the problem is now gone should be very telling to the Unionist Community in NI - if only they would open their eyes.

[RAyMO]

46 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

, if EU wants licensed access to UK territorial waters for some fishing they will have to give something back, with the backstop in play Brussels could have kept the old fishing arrangement without reciprocal cost. 

There will be very little reciprocal coast - fishing I think accounts for 0.12% of the economy. The deal will be access to markets for access to fishing. At the minute we export 80% of our catch and conversely import 70% of the fish we eat.

Clearly we are catching fish not currently appetizing to the British market and so exporting it - while having to import fish caught elsewhere which is more in line with our tastes. You could argue the EU boats are catching the fish we like in our waters and selling it back to us and to a small degree that would be right. But the quotas currently in place actually favour us in that regard. We have relatively high quotas for cod and haddock for example. And sustainability will still be an issue after Brexit as it is now.

In other words if fishermen believe quotas will go with the Brexit - they are wrong. The UK will continue to impose its own quotas on Fishing.

Edited November 9, 2019 by RAyMO

[L.A.T.1961]

5 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

There will be very little reciprocal coast - fishing I think accounts for 0.12% of the economy. The deal will be access to markets for access to fishing. At the minute we export 80% of our catch and conversely import 70% of the fish we eat.

Clearly we are catching fish not currently appetizing to the British market and so exporting it - while having to import fish caught elsewhere which is more in line with our tastes.

Fishing is more important for some EU members than others, for the UK economy it is about the opportunity of building it back up in the future rather than its current value. France/Macron will not be happy if fishermen join protesting yellow jackets due to a lack of access. It is now a bargaining chip for the UK in future FTA negotiations.

I see the UK giving some fishing licenses to EU member states, which fishermen will have to pay for, and UK selling fish into the EU market.  

[stevewinn]

1 hour ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

 

I have a slightly different view. The backstop was the big problem and it has now gone. The backstop allowed the EU to keep UK tied almost indefinitely to Brussels and UK had no independent mechanism to get out. 

This would have been used, as Macron pointed out at the time, to force every concession from UK that Brussels could think of in the future trade deal. This would have been brino.

All ties included in the current WA are time limited, Nigel has also acknowledged this. His argument is that these ties could go on for as long as it takes to get an FTA.

So it is important for a government to be elected with a big enough majority to arrange a new FTA quickly and, if necessary, to say no FTA is better than a bad FTA.

Given how seriously folks took Boris's threat to leave without a withdrawal deal I don't think we will see the same approach from Brussels with FTA negotiations, as happened with the May lead WA negotiations, if Boris is elected with a decent majority? 

The letter of intent on a future FTA is not legally binding and although it talks of close cooperation this is open to interpretation and this is well understood on both sides of the channel.

With the backstop gone it resets the negotiations and puts all chips back on the table, if EU wants licensed access to UK territorial waters for some fishing they will have to give something back, with the backstop in play Brussels could have kept the old fishing arrangement without reciprocal cost. 

How the EU originally planed to use the backstop - 

"warning came from the French President Emmanuel Macron, who suggested that if the UK was unwilling to compromise in negotiations on fishing, which would need to make rapid progress, then talks on a wider trade deal would be slow. The president implied (threatened) that without sufficient progress on trade, the backstop plan to avoid a hard border in Ireland would have to be implemented, including a temporary customs union for the whole of the UK." 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46336962 

The future FTA is the important factor and the EU have now lost their backstop leverage and are also faced, not with a remainer T May, but potentially Boris. 

During the wasted years also known as the transition period the UK will be tied to the EU, in all areas, we'll be unable to sign any Free trade deals. ECJ will apply to EU citizens living in the UK and UK courts will have to follow EU laws when dealing with EU citizens. still paying the EU £39Billion for nothing. when BRexit MP;s say the deal is tolerable then in my view its a poor deal and i'd rather we left with a clean break. the EU will be in not great hurry to bring the transition period or follow on trade negotiations to a conclusion when the UK is still on the hook and all this nonsense with Northern Ireland. for me the moment Boris in a ditch remark, a leader spouting he'd rather be dead in a ditch and then fold like a pack of cards. he had nothing up his sleeve only bluffing. just highlights the dire state of British politics when after all this the Tories still look the most credible party across the board.

I'd wish the British public would turn their backs on the traditional parties and vote the Brexit party even if only to have them as king makers. Once again, both major parties are committing to hopelessly extravagant spending pledges on what they perceive to be popular causes. Neither can hope to fulfil these pledges without undertaking a level of borrowing that would bankrupt the country. Unless, of course, they have no real intention of honouring their promises. They must think that we are idiots. If we vote for them, then there will no longer be any room for doubt.

Its come down to this to get some version of Brexit across the line. - i just hope the Great British public have learnt something.

 

[L.A.T.1961]

10 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

During the wasted years also known as the transition period the UK will be tied to the EU, in all areas, we'll be unable to sign any Free trade deals. ECJ will apply to EU citizens living in the UK and UK courts will have to follow EU laws when dealing with EU citizens. still paying the EU £39Billion for nothing. when BRexit MP;s say the deal is tolerable then in my view its a poor deal and i'd rather we left with a clean break. the EU will be in not great hurry to bring the transition period or follow on trade negotiations to a conclusion when the UK is still on the hook and all this nonsense with Northern Ireland. for me the moment Boris in a ditch remark, a leader spouting he'd rather be dead in a ditch and then fold like a pack of cards. he had nothing up his sleeve only bluffing. just highlights the dire state of British politics when after all this the Tories still look the most credible party across the board.

I'd wish the British public would turn their backs on the traditional parties and vote the Brexit party even if only to have them as king makers. Once again, both major parties are committing to hopelessly extravagant spending pledges on what they perceive to be popular causes. Neither can hope to fulfil these pledges without undertaking a level of borrowing that would bankrupt the country. Unless, of course, they have no real intention of honouring their promises. They must think that we are idiots. If we vote for them, then there will no longer be any room for doubt.

Its come down to this to get some version of Brexit across the line. - i just hope the Great British public have learnt something.

 

 

Some version of “no deal” could still happen in a number of different scenarios. -

"If the Withdrawal Agreement is passed by parliament and the transition period kicks in that doesn't mean the possibility of no deal is removed entirely, it just means a different kind of no deal. 

While there would be a transition period in which to negotiate a future relationship with the EU, there is no guarantee that these negotiations would be successful. The transition period lasts until the end of 2020, or 2022 (provided that is agreed before 1 July 2020) at the very latest, after that if no future relationship deal was agreed then Great Britain’s relationship with the EU would be on World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms."

The UK has not burned its boat yet  

https://fullfact.org/europe/no-deal-brexit-2020-end-transition/

[spud the mackem]

6 hours ago, RAyMO said:

There will be very little reciprocal coast - fishing I think accounts for 0.12% of the economy. The deal will be access to markets for access to fishing. At the minute we export 80% of our catch and conversely import 70% of the fish we eat.

Clearly we are catching fish not currently appetizing to the British market and so exporting it - while having to import fish caught elsewhere which is more in line with our tastes. You could argue the EU boats are catching the fish we like in our waters and selling it back to us and to a small degree that would be right. But the quotas currently in place actually favour us in that regard. We have relatively high quotas for cod and haddock for example. And sustainability will still be an issue after Brexit as it is now.

In other words if fishermen believe quotas will go with the Brexit - they are wrong. The UK will continue to impose its own quotas on Fishing.

We should do what the Icelanders did and impose a strict  limit around the British coast ,and any foreign trawler caught fishing in those waters should be impounded and the fish confiscated . (that would cause a bit of concern to the Russians who send their boats into our waters and hoover up any kind of fish ). but then we could always give them a licence and a quota , then the French fishermen would go on strike and block all their ports LOL.

[bee]

18 hours ago, spud the mackem said:

This Election is not about who might win but its about Leave or Remain , the general public will vote on how they see it . Apart from the numpties who vote for a party because their dad or grandad voted  for it , and the no brainer people who can't make up their minds , the election will be won on a leave /remain  basis .If your M.P. voted leave ,and you want to remain you would not vote for that person , and vice versa , and how can you vote for an M.P. which you voted for last time, when they have decided to "jump ship" from one party to another , they aren't thinking about their constituents in this respect , but keeping their pay packets . I just hope that the public see through this mess and get rid of any mind changing M.P. ,and also those who voted leave or remain when their constituents wished otherwise. This applies to All parties as non of them are telling the Truth , and the biggest Scammers are Johnson and Corbyn. All criticism accepted with a smile ,cheers .

 

I totally agree that this election is about Leaving or Remaining ... it was called to help move the process on
 but already a lot of people are getting sidetracked with the usual manifesto promises etc.... unless this is just
the media trying to steer away from it a bit and bolster up the 2 party system...

I had someone from the Labour Party knock on my door with a leaflet yesterday... it was pouring with rain
and they could have just put it through the letter box but we had a little chat... he was a nice middle aged man
who said that he had voted to Leave (I think he was telling the truth).... that he wasn't a Blairite and jokingly
said he supposed he was '''loony left''' )... I said I trusted Nigel Farage and that I was voing for the Brexit Party -
he said that Labour supported Leaving and they were going to negociate a New Deal with the EU and get us out...
I thought.... mmmmm I don't know about THAT.... he said something about Watson leaving the Party and I said
yes they are really screwing Corbyn over... he kind of agreed...

We both said a couple of other things then he offered his hand and we shook hands and it was all very civilized..  

 

 
 

[bee]

18 hours ago, spud the mackem said:

Agreed...I will for who I think will take this Country out of Europe , you can't believe Johnson or Corbyn with their lies and promises which will never happen ,and Swinson is a lunatic . I voted for Thatcher then she closed the shipyards and the mines and took us to war so then I voted for Blair (big mistake) , so I went back to Tory , and Cameron is a coward , so (head scratching ) ,which party will keep this Country at the top , I'll find out on the 13th December , but I wouldn't mind Ann Widdicombe as P.M.  I guess its Brexit for me . My Boss once told me that I was the "greatest fighter of lost cause that the world has ever seen ". Regards.

 

This is why I think it was a good strategic move for Nigel not to stand in the GE... it stops people getting
obsessed with him and stops the media going crazy against him (well more than they do already)...

It opens it all up for other Brexit Party members like Widdecombe... imagine if Boris scrapes through and
has to have a coalition with the Brexit Party and Anne Widdicombe is Deputy PM... she would make
mince meat of him... on a daily basis..... 

 

[bee]

17 hours ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

if Boris is elected with a decent majority? 

I think the cracks are starting to show..... yesterday the Daily Mail front page was dominated with
HUGE font saying..... STAND DOWN NIGEL!...... they are practically begging the Brexit Party to
shut up and go away... 

they angled it that there was growing pressure from within the Brexit Party not to stand - and although
there might be one or two or a small few that are getting cold feet.... I don't think for a minute that
Nigel is going to blink first.... Boris has the most to loose and if he wants to remain  PM he will blink
first... and form a one off alliance with the BP.... he has the opportunity now to blame Nigel Farage
for making it necessary to go for a clean break Brexit.... to save the country from.... quote the Mail..
"a shabby coalition of socialists...."...

The Mail concocted a letter that they are sending to all Brexit Party candidates basically begging them
not to stand....

When the Labour supporter knocked on my door with a leaflet yesterday and we had a little chat...
I showed him the Mail and said that the Tories were in trouble if they didn't form an alliance with the BP...
he was quite pleased to hear that 

 

 

 

[stevewinn]

18 hours ago, RAyMO said:

There will be very little reciprocal coast - fishing I think accounts for 0.12% of the economy. The deal will be access to markets for access to fishing. At the minute we export 80% of our catch and conversely import 70% of the fish we eat.

Clearly we are catching fish not currently appetizing to the British market and so exporting it - while having to import fish caught elsewhere which is more in line with our tastes. You could argue the EU boats are catching the fish we like in our waters and selling it back to us and to a small degree that would be right. But the quotas currently in place actually favour us in that regard. We have relatively high quotas for cod and haddock for example. And sustainability will still be an issue after Brexit as it is now.

In other words if fishermen believe quotas will go with the Brexit - they are wrong. The UK will continue to impose its own quotas on Fishing.

Lets also remember that the British govt of the day seen fit to sacrifice our Fishing industry and coastal fishing communities in favour of joining the EEC and that's how we arrive at your figure today. i love how 100% of the quota from year dot to 1975 was British. then the decline started where the quota was divided up by the EEC members, and as the EEC expanded and countries joined such as Spain & Portugal 1986. the British quota reduced further, its great when you hear Europhiles argue The UK has more than 50% of the quota in the North Sea, oh, just over 50% of the quota in British waters where once it was a 100% quota for the British. English channel now sees the French with 75% of the quota and the UK with 9%. where it was once 100% in our waters.

It was only last year we seen it in action. when we seen British Fishing boats being attacked for fishing in French waters, all legal under EU rules. French quite happy plundering our waters with over 2,000 vessels but no so keen when we send five boats into their waters.

why im on the subject remember when the French fishermen stopped UK lorries in France and emptied their load of fish all over the road, lets also remember how French Farmers protesting over British lamb entering France set fire to a British animal transporter burning all the sheep on board alive.

all this has been happening for years, 1980's 1990's 2000's but people forget, uninterested or simply don't know.

The French limited the import of British lamb in early 2000 because they feared BSE in sheep, when there was no such concern, all in a bid to protect their own domestic industry. im also reminded when i type, Bird flu. remember when a dead Seagull washed up on the East Coast of the UK reported by a member of the public authorities collect the bird take samples and the Bird had died of bird flu. immediately French banned all UK imports of poultry. three weeks later three dead Swans where found dead on the French German border which tested positive for Bird Flu, no banning of French or German poultry.

UK is a mere cash cow for Europe. no-wonder they call us treasure Island.

 

 

[Space Commander Travis]

On the subject of the successful UK Economy, British Steel to be rescued by Chinese firm in £70m deal

So once again Red China rescues Western Capitalism.

[stevewinn]

All the polls have the Tory party winning and winning well 90+ majority. Crazy if it turns out that way.

[L.A.T.1961]

Brexit Party will not contest 317 Conservative-held seats at the General Election

Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party will not stand in the 317 Conservative-held constituencies in the General Election, after previously saying the party would field candidates in 600 seats.

Farage said he made the decision to strip back the party’s campaign due to Boris Johnson’s statement yesterday concerning the UK’s future relationship with the EU post-Brexit.

Johnson said there would not be close political alignment with Brussels, and that he would not extend the Brexit transition period past December 2020.

https://www.cityam.com/brexit-party-will-not-stand-in-317-conservative-held-seats-at-general-election/

 

A difficult decision for Farage but probably the only viable option and no electoral pact. 

[stevewinn]

excellent decision by Farage and Brexit party. Remain are ****ed and this will show in this election. lets hope the Brexit Party take a good few Labour seats.

[Duke Wellington]

Here are some interesting (and I think rather hilarious facts on Brexit) bearing in mind we have to vote in a General Election next month https://fullfact.org/online/referendum-results-by-constituency/

In the 2016 EU referendum:

148 Labour Constituencies voted to leave and just 84 to remain

247 Tory Constituencies voted to leave and just 80 to remain.

That accounts for 559 MP seats in Parliament from a total of 650 with a grand total of 395 MP constituencies voting to leave between the Conservative and Labour parties. A Government needs approximately 326 seats to have a voting majority in Parliament.

Now focusing on each parties election strategy:

Tories - Will go for a Hard-Brexit or a deal. This means they will alienate a lot of their own remain supporters but as only 80 of their constituencies voted to leave this isn't going to be that many. We must also remember that there is no acceptable remain party for them to vote for.

Labour - They will go for a deal, then have a 2nd referendum on that deal or staying in the EU. So they will alienate their Hard-Brexit supporters. A majority of their supporters voted to leave so this could be a potential disaster for Corbyn.

Liberal Dems - They will keep us in the EU. So they will alienate all their Hard-Brexit and deal supporters. This could be a potential disaster for them too.

Brexit Party - Want a Hard-Brexit and is going to target Lib-Lab seats. So those Lib-Lab supporters who hate Tories will vote for them. They offer a clear an acceptable alternative to them.

I`m going to predict a clear Tory win. Due to the Brexit Party splitting Lib-Lab vote. I`m going to say somewhere in the region of 400 seats.

I wonder how many people the Labour Party are also going to lose due to the Corbynite brand of socialism regardless of their views on Brexit? They will be going Lib Dem or Brexit Party too.

Bye-bye Corbyn!!!

Edited November 11, 2019 by RabidMongoose

[bee]

4 hours ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

Brexit Party will not contest 317 Conservative-held seats at the General Election

Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party will not stand in the 317 Conservative-held constituencies in the General Election, after previously saying the party would field candidates in 600 seats.

Farage said he made the decision to strip back the party’s campaign due to Boris Johnson’s statement yesterday concerning the UK’s future relationship with the EU post-Brexit.

Johnson said there would not be close political alignment with Brussels, and that he would not extend the Brexit transition period past December 2020.

https://www.cityam.com/brexit-party-will-not-stand-in-317-conservative-held-seats-at-general-election/

 

A difficult decision for Farage but probably the only viable option and no electoral pact. 

 

One can only imagine the intense discussions within the Brexit Party and with either a Boris go between
or Boris himself... that have been going on over the weekend....

 

3 hours ago, stevewinn said:

excellent decision by Farage and Brexit party. Remain are ****ed and this will show in this election. lets hope the Brexit Party take a good few Labour seats.

 

I'm happy with the decision... and trust Nigel to do the right thing....

Thinking about it more... a formal alliance with the Conservative Party could have alienated
previous Labour Voters who are now potential BP voters.... they could have felt that the BP
was getting too cosy with the Tories - this way the BP is separate and if they can get some
seats they can apply pressure from within... for an eventual clean break Brexit..

 

 

 

[L.A.T.1961]

10 minutes ago, bee said:

 

One can only imagine the intense discussions within the Brexit Party and with either a Boris go between

Thinking about it more... a formal alliance with the Conservative Party could have alienated
previous Labour Voters who are now potential BP voters.... they could have felt that the BP
was getting too cosy with the Tories - this way the BP is separate and if they can get some
seats they can apply pressure from within... for an eventual clean break Brexit..

 

This is important as opposition parties could claim that the Tories are the same as B.P and vice versa, although they are now claiming the same thing anyhow, and throwing Trump into the mix for good measure. 

But it is not a pact as the Lib Dems have done with the Greens and they know it.  

Some quotes -  "Labour David Lammy says the Brexit Party leader is “bottling it” by standing down in Tory seats, but says it’s now more vital than ever for remainers to “cooperate”.

"Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson said: “The Conservative Party are the Brexit Party now.” 

From these responses it looks like remainers are a bit miffed to say the least. Labour would love Lib Dems to stand down now in a lot of seats.  But they are not about to give up potential extra MP's.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/nigel-farage-has-given-tories-the-perfect-campaign-message/

 

[bee]

2 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

From these responses it looks like remainers are a bit miffed to say the least.

 

yeah they were probably thrilled at the prospect of the BP fielding candidates in all the constituencies...
splitting the Leave vote -  

but Nigel has scuppered that after giving the Tories a bit of a fright - before the latest announcement..

[bee]

21 minutes ago, L.A.T.1961 said:

Labour would love Lib Dems to stand down now in a lot of seats.  But they are not about to give up potential extra MP's.

 

Can't help remembering that Alastair Campbell and Cherie Blair admitted that they voted Lib Dem
in the EU elections... Tony Blair said he still voted Labour but I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't...

this is a General Election but Labour Blairite types could, en masse, go for Lib Dems and Remain.. ???

dunno

  

Edited November 11, 2019 by bee

[TigerBright19]

If we have several Brexit MPs elected, and Brexit is eventually delivered, will those MPs stand down, or will they switch parties and become Tories? (like the MPs who switched to Lib-Dem and Change UK?)  Will this discourage Labour voters to vote for the Brexit party?  They have good relations with the Tories and wear a blue rosette.  Are they in essence a wing party to the Tories?

 

 

Edited November 11, 2019 by Aaron2016

[bee]

32 minutes ago, Aaron2016 said:

If we have several Brexit MPs elected, and Brexit is eventually delivered, will those MPs stand down, or will they switch parties and become Tories? (like the MPs who switched to Lib-Dem and Change UK?)  Will this discourage Labour voters to vote for the Brexit party?  They have good relations with the Tories and wear a blue rosette.  Are they in essence a wing party to the Tories?

 

 

 

re bolded..... it's hard to say what will happen 'on the day' with this GE.... without second guessing
the future of the Brexit Party -   but they do have their own policies like for example getting rid
of the House of Lords and replacing it with a smaller elected chamber... and doing something about
postal voting corruption.. like getting rid of that as well (although they would have something to replace
it with for the Housebound etc...)the Conservative Party  called the referendum (even though Cameron
thought Remain would win)...  and has tried to get it done albeit in a half hearted manner a lot of the time -

so there are strong informal ties to the Brexit Party at the moment and that's organic... as the Tories are
in Govt. and so it's going to have to go through them....

but 'Labour' Leave voters will have an influence in the future of the BP - Claire Fox has lead the way with that...

That's what I'm thinking at the moment anyway...

 

 

Edited November 11, 2019 by bee

[RAyMO]

37 minutes ago, Aaron2016 said:

If we have several Brexit MPs elected, and Brexit is eventually delivered, will those MPs stand down, or will they switch parties and become Tories? (like the MPs who switched to Lib-Dem and Change UK?)  Will this discourage Labour voters to vote for the Brexit party?  They have good relations with the Tories and wear a blue rosette.  Are they in essence a wing party to the Tories?

It would be surprising if many Brexit MPs were elected - though that depends on your definition of many of course.

I think Farage calculates that he wouldn't have many MPs - his decision today IMO shows he knew it would be stupid trying to fund 650 or whatever candidates, with a return likely to be less than a handful at best. If latest polls are to be believed the Brexit party will not get any MPs.

His offer today, while I am sure welcomed by the Tories, is really that great for them either - the Tories need to take Labour seats - in which Brexit party will still fight and take Tory votes.

[bee]

 

Nigel explains his decision.....