Topic: Brexit: "Vultus inanis est et mori in fossa ego sum!"

[losCHUNK]

Ok maths aside (it's too early for maths) which you are right about

No MP of any colour should come out of this god forsaken process with any credit. The Brexit referendum was at it's very core a lie to the country that only history will come to judge us.

But least of all Tory MP's. A party that owned the rhetoric of 'project fear' and 'remoaners' and the right wing media. When anyone that looks at the evidence for 1 second would know just what a bad decision Brexit was/is/will be. These MP's have been standing by their party long before the referendum.

The fact that you think that these MP's should be congratulated for possibly extending brexit negotiations and possibly getting a GE shows just how low the bar is in politics

I would have more respect for them that came out said 'Yeah. This was a huge mistake and I will now campaign behind revoking article 50 and remaining in the EU'

You're not wrong, but, when Brexiteers say they must respect the result of the referendum they have somewhat of a point imho.  Those MPs had to at least explore the possibility of providing the electorate with what was promised.  It's not something I agree with, but, trying to be balanced then I think that's reasonable to say.

What has been said by many including myself is career politicians trying to protect their career.  Last night showed Boris that at least some have a backbone and I think for that they should be patted on the back, they had red lines and Boris tried steamrolling them.

This doesn't mean I forgive them for everything else, like enabling the parties austerity measures, but in this specific case they just saved our bacon by being principled.

If I'm passing around blame, then it isn't limited to the Torys.  Corbyn is someone I've been throwing under the bus but his performance yesterday deserves credit, too.

[Zeb]

If Corbyn leads an alternative government now, surely he would be kicked in quite a few constituencies in the Labour heartland at the subsequent election. I see the Mail online has a 'Death of Democracy' headline, (while the print version is more circumspect). That will dial up. Might be cleverer to go with Clarke who's not standing again.

Definitely, if that's where they're kind of moosying up to should they pass this bill. (Alternative is the quick bill option, unamended, to go straight to an election.) But not sure Corbyn and co. will see many upsides to it without being seen to be in charge and the world not ending. Still, further down the line. Watching everyone catch up with the idea that this bill doesn't 'take no deal off the table' is interesting, especially as the consequences of that are thought out. "What if Johnson wins the election, repeals the law, and then gives us 'no deal'?" etc. Well, quite.

[Asam]

 if Labour lose this election, wouldn’t it be more in the parties long term interest to stand for remain and repealing article 50?

We all know Brexit is a disaster, why not get off the fence and ensure labour is on the right side of history?

If Labour win = no Brexit
If Labour must form a coalition = no Brexit
If Labour lose = it’s Brexit

The Tories will position this as leave vs remain, Labour may as well go all in for remain, the Labour voters would at least know clearly what the position is and if it is  general election they can focus on wider issues such as Boris selling off the NHS to Trump

[eddymunster]

You're not wrong, but, when Brexiteers say they must respect the result of the referendum they have somewhat of a point imho. 

MPs have a responsibility to reprisent their constituents best interest. How is Brexit in the interest of anyone excluding possibly the mega rich?

Those MPs had to at least explore the possibility of providing the electorate with what was promised. 

How do we explore 350mil a week for the NHS?

Every politician with any kind of moral integrity should be shouting remain from the rooftops and should have been from the word go.

[Asam]

You're not wrong, but, when Brexiteers say they must respect the result of the referendum they have somewhat of a point imho.  Those MPs had to at least explore the possibility of providing the electorate with what was promised.  It's not something I agree with, but, trying to be balanced then I think that's reasonable to say.

What has been said by many including myself is career politicians trying to protect their career.  Last night showed Boris that at least some have a backbone and I think for that they should be patted on the back, they had red lines and Boris tried steamrolling them.

This doesn't mean I forgive them for everything else, like enabling the parties austerity measures, but in this specific case they just saved our bacon by being principled.

If I'm passing around blame, then it isn't limited to the Torys.  Corbyn is someone I've been throwing under the bus but his performance yesterday deserves credit, too.

The Brexiteers lied through their teeth and broke campaign financing laws to win, 3 years on, how much of their magic unicorn Brexit has come true? They had their chance, fuck em!

[Zeb]

if Labour lose this election, wouldn’t it be more in the parties long term interest to stand for remain and repealing article 50?

We all know Brexit is a disaster, why not get off the fence and ensure labour is on the right side of history?

If Labour win = no Brexit
If Labour must form a coalition = no Brexit
If Labour lose = it’s Brexit

The Tories will position this as leave vs remain, Labour may as well go all in for remain, the Labour voters would at least know clearly what the position is and if it is  general election they can focus on wider issues such as Boris selling off the NHS to Trump

Sorry, misread that initially. Not enough coffee.

Yeah. Issue for Labour is that they're fearful (and are right to be) that an overtly 'remain' position will guarantee that they lose a lot of seats this coming election. Tories are targeting very specific voters and they're ones which Corbyn and co. had pinned all their hopes on winning back over/keeping for Labour. So when we get to 'long term' discussions, it starts to head into 'who does the Labour party want to represent?'. Stereotypical young,liberal, city person vs older, socially conservative, town resident.

[losCHUNK]

MPs have a responsibility to reprisent their constituents best interest. How is Brexit in the interest of anyone excluding possibly the mega rich?

How do we explore 350mil a week for the NHS?

Every politician with any kind of moral integrity should be shouting remain from the rooftops and should have been from the word go.

I said this doesn;t mean we should forgive them for everything, there's plenty of blame to pass around and I wouldn't shed a tear if they all lost their jobs tomorrow.

The Brexiteers lied through their teeth and broke campaign financing laws to win, 3 years on, how much of their magic unicorn Brexit has come true? They had their chance, fuck em!

I think that's what people are realising, to be honest, I just hope the British public see it too.  I'm not too confident about that.

[Zeb]

Circus schedule for today (via Sky's Beth Rigby):

- 12pm Johnson's 1st ever PMQs
- 12.45pm Javid’s spending round
- 3pm MPs take control. Debate/vote on blocking No Deal Brexit (voting starts c7pm)
- Then 90min debate & vote on PM’s motion for early GE. Vote expected 9-11pm

[butchersdog]

You're not wrong, but, when Brexiteers say they must respect the result of the referendum they have somewhat of a point imho.  Those MPs had to at least explore the possibility of providing the electorate with what was promised.  It's not something I agree with, but, trying to be balanced then I think that's reasonable to say.

What has been said by many including myself is career politicians trying to protect their career.  Last night showed Boris that at least some have a backbone and I think for that they should be patted on the back, they had red lines and Boris tried steamrolling them.

This doesn't mean I forgive them for everything else, like enabling the parties austerity measures, but in this specific case they just saved our bacon by being principled.

If I'm passing around blame, then it isn't limited to the Torys.  Corbyn is someone I've been throwing under the bus but his performance yesterday deserves credit, too.

Why we should respect the result of an illegal, non democratically binding referendum mate? MP's first responsibility is to act in the national interest. Brexit clearly isn't.

[jepovic]

Nope.

But if there is an election promised then they will let that happen. They don't want a no deal brexit (even if they are in a better position to cope with one than we are).

I wouldn't be so sure about that. The Brexit fatigue is real in many countries.

It's very hard to see how a GE would resolve the fundamental problem that the UK  still hasn't decided what kind of brexit it wants. Let's not forget that after all these years, the two major parties still haven't united internally around a realistic brexit option. There's no reasonable scenario where a GE would lead to a majority forming for any flavor of brexit (or remain).

Here's the real killer from EU's point of view: In a GE, the two key politicians, Johnson and Corbyn, would both campaign for options that don't exist. Whatever the outcome of a GE, the confusion would remain.

A referendum could work, but that would require the parliament to unite around what options should be on the ballot. Again, nothing suggests the parliament could unite around this.

[BoRed]

Circus schedule for today (via Sky's Beth Rigby):

- 12pm Johnson's 1st ever PMQs

First and hopefully last.

[losCHUNK]

Why we should respect the result of an illegal, non democratically binding referendum mate? MP's first responsibility is to act in the national interest. Brexit clearly isn't.

It's so hard to argue from a position I don't agree with. 

Regardless of the circumstances of the ref, it happened and this is what we're left with (I'm sorry to put it like that but It's not something I can defend).  If MPs turned around immediately after and said 'we were wrong and so were you' then that wouldn't wash and open the doors to even more Brexit backlash, wether it be another ref or GE, giving even more support to Brexiteers as they can now adopt a moral high ground.  IMO this would've affected both sides of the house just as much as the shit show we're experiencing now.

After I had friends whose opinions I respect saying they'd change their vote from remain if a 2nd ref happened, cos of democracy. I think this is idiotic but I can't control how they think.  I also don't think public opinion has changed drastically which is why I'm not confident with another ref or GE, judging from the polls and such, it's grim reading and this is despite all the debate that has occurred in that time.

Now the public get to decide every 5 years to elect a leader, we can't remove the Torys because their policies are damaging to the country, or because the opposition didn't put up a credible fight, or because they used spin to promote an agenda.  We can't change the fact it happened, like.  In this time we've also had an election.

Politicians ignoring the people is partly why we're in this mess, remain or leave, and it's only since this shitstorm has started rolling that people are becoming aware of the implications of Brexit.  I think the public is losing its stomach for a No Deal exit and this would'nt have happened if Parliament were'nt acting like children for the last 3/4 years and creating the relevant debate instead of the 'spin'.

So i'm just saying, I can see the defence of MPs when they say they're just implementing their electorates wishes.  It's also why I gave some credit to MPs who went against their electorates wishes and (eventually) sided with their principles instead.  It would've been too easy to do and we'd be left with nothing.

[Kekule]

Rees-Mogg's performance in Parliament yesterday convinced four more Tories MP to rebel.  That's to go with the chap who defected to the Lib-Dems after hearing him on LBC on Monday.

That's 5 MPs he's cost them in under 24 hours.   

[filopastry]

Rees-Mogg's performance in Parliament yesterday convinced four more Tories MP to rebel.  That's to go with the chap who defected to the Lib-Dems after hearing him on LBC on Monday.

That's 5 MPs he's cost them in under 24 hours.   

I'm not sure they care.

They want true believers in the next Parliament, a lot of the behaviour recently seemed custom designed to induce a large rebellion.

They are going to get a GE as well, maybe not on the 14-15th October but soon nonetheless, the longer Parliament blocks a new GE when we have a no longer functioning government, the more they will portray it as Parliament blocking the will of the people and being terrified of giving "The People" a say again. That is a dangerous attack line given the terms the next GE will be fought under.

[redmark]

I'm not sure they care.

They want true believers in the next Parliament, a lot of the behaviour recently seemed custom designed to induce a large rebellion.

They are going to get a GE as well, maybe not on the 14-15th October but soon nonetheless, the longer Parliament blocks a new GE when we have a no longer functioning government, the more they will portray it as Parliament blocking the will of the people and being terrified of giving "The People" a say again. That is a dangerous attack line given the terms the next GE will be fought under.

"We're giving the PM the opportunity to secure the deal he says he wants on October 17th."

[Nobby Reserve]

Yeah. Issue for Labour is that they're fearful (and are right to be) that an overtly 'remain' position will guarantee that they lose a lot of seats this coming election. Tories are targeting very specific voters and they're ones which Corbyn and co. had pinned all their hopes on winning back over/keeping for Labour. So when we get to 'long term' discussions, it starts to head into 'who does the Labour party want to represent?'. Stereotypical young,liberal, city person vs older, socially conservative, town resident.

The problem Labour have is, as their policy of 'deliberate ambiguity' unravelled under closer scrutiny, they began to fall between two stools - too 'remainey' for leavers; too 'leavey' for remainers.

With the Tories and the B[N]P sewing up the vast majority of the strong-leave vote, they began losing votes to the Lib Dems, who Labour have inadvertently reanimated from the political wilderness.

They cannot recover the strong-leave vote, and indeed official party policy has shifted to the 2nd Ref/remain position. They must solidify this, work with the Lib Dems so as not to split the remain vote too much in key marginals, and count on the instinctive hatred of Tory twats within 'leavey' northern heartlands.


Longer term, the anti-leave parties need to work bloody hard to counter the decades of lies and anti-EU propaganda by the scumbag right-wing media, and not just talk of the downside of leaving the EU, but promote the benefits.

[Snail]

In other news, we're heading towards recession:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2019/sep/04/pound-sterling-markets-rally-no-deal-brexit-bank-of-england-business-live

[filopastry]

I don't think there is a majority in favour of "No Deal" in the country but that doesn't mean you can't win an election supporting it.

YouGov
@YouGov
“At the end of the day it’s No Deal or Corbyn”, wrote Daniel Finkelstein today. When we put that choice to the public they said they prefer No Deal by 48% to 35% https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/08/17/48-35-britons-would-rather-have-no-deal-and-no-cor?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=no_deal_no_corbyn

There is a lot of work to be done over the campaign.

[eddymunster]

I don't think there is a majority in favour of "No Deal" in the country but that doesn't mean you can't win an election supporting it.

There is a lot of work to be done over the campaign.

How are 2% of the Brexit party supporting JC? 

[filopastry]

How are 2% of the Brexit party supporting JC? 

Fuck knows, you always get a few nutters in any poll

[Rush 82]

In other news, we're heading towards recession:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2019/sep/04/pound-sterling-markets-rally-no-deal-brexit-bank-of-england-business-live

[thejbs]

It's so hard to argue from a position I don't agree with. 

Regardless of the circumstances of the ref, it happened and this is what we're left with (I'm sorry to put it like that but It's not something I can defend).  If MPs turned around immediately after and said 'we were wrong and so were you' then that wouldn't wash and open the doors to even more Brexit backlash, wether it be another ref or GE, giving even more support to Brexiteers as they can now adopt a moral high ground.  IMO this would've affected both sides of the house just as much as the shit show we're experiencing now.

After I had friends whose opinions I respect saying they'd change their vote from remain if a 2nd ref happened, cos of democracy. I think this is idiotic but I can't control how they think.  I also don't think public opinion has changed drastically which is why I'm not confident with another ref or GE, judging from the polls and such, it's grim reading and this is despite all the debate that has occurred in that time.

Now the public get to decide every 5 years to elect a leader, we can't remove the Torys because their policies are damaging to the country, or because the opposition didn't put up a credible fight, or because they used spin to promote an agenda.  We can't change the fact it happened, like.  In this time we've also had an election.

Politicians ignoring the people is partly why we're in this mess, remain or leave, and it's only since this shitstorm has started rolling that people are becoming aware of the implications of Brexit.  I think the public is losing its stomach for a No Deal exit and this would'nt have happened if Parliament were'nt acting like children for the last 3/4 years and creating the relevant debate instead of the 'spin'.

So i'm just saying, I can see the defence of MPs when they say they're just implementing their electorates wishes.  It's also why I gave some credit to MPs who went against their electorates wishes and (eventually) sided with their principles instead.  It would've been too easy to do and we'd be left with nothing.

Politicians haven't been ignoring the people. They've been ignoring those unlikely to vote or vote for them. In this respect 'the people' bear some of the responsibility. A friend who joined me at a brexit protest hadn't even bothered to vote in the referendum.

And politicians have a duty to do what is best for the country rather than the 'will of the people.' They should not take action they know will damage the country and impoverish millions just because of a narrow referendum vote - especially when it is unclear what form of brexit was being voted for (no Deal, for example, was dismissed by vote leave).

The people aren't always collectively right. When we stopped executions, decriminalised homosexuality and gave women more reproductive rights (except NI) the majority of the people opposed what parliament was doing. But parliamentary sovereignty meant the good of th h ed  country came ahead of the will of the majority. As it should be.

[No666]

What that poll proves is that Corbyn is toxic to a percentage of the voting public. But it doesn't take into account people voting Lib Dem and preferring a hung parliament to either of those extremes.

[scouseman]

I was really shocked by some of the language Johnson was using like surrender etc and to think this guy is our PM #not in my name. Can we deselect him please as he too voted against his party and yet gets away with it. Hope we get a no confidence vote at some stage.   

[Kashinoda]

I don't think there is a majority in favour of "No Deal" in the country but that doesn't mean you can't win an election supporting it.

There is a lot of work to be done over the campaign.

That data is already ancient.

[filopastry]

That data is already ancient.

I doubt it has moved too much up until yesterday. I haven't see a great deal of momentum towards Remain recently from any polling either, resumably because the govt has been very active with its messaging.

That isn't to say Labour can't turn it around but it will need a bloody good campaign.

The good news is they will be going into the campaign in better shape than in 2017, the bad news more minds may already be made up going into this one.

Johnson will be the wildcard, we all assume he will be a much better campaigner than May was (a very low bar it has to be said), but who knows until the campaign starts.

My safe predicion is that it will be nastiest GE campaign we have ever seen.

[losCHUNK]

Politicians haven't been ignoring the people. They've been ignoring those unlikely to vote or vote for them. In this respect 'the people' bear some of the responsibility. A friend who joined me at a brexit protest hadn't even bothered to vote in the referendum.

And politicians have a duty to do what is best for the country rather than the 'will of the people.' They should not take action they know will damage the country and impoverish millions just because of a narrow referendum vote - especially when it is unclear what form of brexit was being voted for (no Deal, for example, was dismissed by vote leave).

The people aren't always collectively right. When we stopped executions, decriminalised homosexuality and gave women more reproductive rights (except NI) the majority of the people opposed what parliament was doing. But parliamentary sovereignty meant the good of th h ed  country came ahead of the will of the majority. As it should be.

I'm not saying the 'will of the people' is always right, I'm saying you can't ignore it, this is partly why I said we can't remove the Tories if their policies are damaging to the country especially when there's public support for it.  It took years of debate to occur before somebody felt comfortable repealing executions etc, it took a change in public opinion to adopt a smoking ban and even then it was met with opposition.  To this day we're still throwing Co2 out and killing the planet.

Politicians are held to account by us and their principles mean nothing if removed by 'us'.

As a Labour voting remainer I feel ignored n all.

[redmark]

Nick Boles (as an example) a little jumpy about Labour statements hinting at potentially agreeing to an early election pre-31st October (with the bill passed and no deal off the table) - because Johnson could win a majority, repeal the bill and leave with no deal on 31st October.

I suspect Labour - finally! - are being a little crafty, positioning themselves as happy to fight an election, but will seek to amend any motion Johnson brings in such a way as he can't support, allowing them to delay and then - Johnson's prorogation kicks in and legislation to call an election can't be enacted until after parliament returns.

[Zeb]

The problem Labour have is, as their policy of 'deliberate ambiguity' unravelled under closer scrutiny, they began to fall between two stools - too 'remainey' for leavers; too 'leavey' for remainers.

With the Tories and the B[N]P sewing up the vast majority of the strong-leave vote, they began losing votes to the Lib Dems, who Labour have inadvertently reanimated from the political wilderness.

They cannot recover the strong-leave vote, and indeed official party policy has shifted to the 2nd Ref/remain position. They must solidify this, work with the Lib Dems so as not to split the remain vote too much in key marginals, and count on the instinctive hatred of Tory twats within 'leavey' northern heartlands.


Longer term, the anti-leave parties need to work bloody hard to counter the decades of lies and anti-EU propaganda by the scumbag right-wing media, and not just talk of the downside of leaving the EU, but promote the benefits.

Yeah. It's old stuff on here though, isn't it? Choices made have consequences. Lexit's going well, I hear. For current circumstances, huge issue with leaning on tribal loyalty and the cultural hatred of Tories is when people perceive Labour's leader to be either worse or not much better. Frottage and Johnson are both pitching the economic offer Labour have been making (Javid will fantasise some more later today) so that starts to fall flatter. Suppress Labour vote by splitting it, pull over those with Kippery leanings, and that's 2017 2019 Tory cunning plan. Failed, overall, in 2017. Which is no doubt why the Tories are rumoured to be looking at opening up the toxic box of issues. If Labour tack too much 'remain' then immigration will be their thing with Cummings there 2016 style. Really the start of the problem is elsewhere and everything after is attempting to mitigate it.

[filopastry]

Nick Boles (as an example) a little jumpy about Labour statements hinting at potentially agreeing to an early election pre-31st October (with the bill passed and no deal off the table) - because Johnson could win a majority, repeal the bill and leave with no deal on 31st October.

I suspect Labour - finally! - are being a little crafty, positioning themselves as happy to fight an election, but will seek to amend any motion Johnson brings in such a way as he can't support, allowing them to delay and then - Johnson's prorogation kicks in and legislation to call an election can't be enacted until after parliament returns.

Parliament can't bind the next Parliament whatever it does, the longer the GE gets delayed with a non functioning government the more the frenzy will be built up by the usual horrible suspects in the media.

All Parliament can do at the moment is stop Johnson effectively sneaking the country out of the EU with No Deal without any Parliamentary oversight, get that done and fight the election.

If Johnson wins the subsequent election he can do whatever he wants anyway, winning the election is the important bit

[reddebs]

Are we likely to see a major upheaval of traditional voting this time where minority parties take the majority vote or is it going to be another hung parliament, coalition, nothing gets done situation?

Unless the fringe parties put forward enough viable candidates across the uk for people to vote for surely it'll end up more of the same?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

[Zeb]

"Special PLP just heard 'unanimous' view that MPs don't want any snap election until after Oct 31, one present tells me." (Huffpost's Paul Waugh)

edit: "A special meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party has just broken up, the near-unanimous view of the room was that Corbyn should hold off on a snap election until after November 1. Corbyn may disagree. But in the words of one figure: "They (MPs) are the ones who have the vote." (FT's Jim Pickard)

[redmark]

Parliament can't bind the next Parliament whatever it does, the longer the GE gets delayed with a non functioning government the more the frenzy will be built up by the usual horrible suspects in the media.

All Parliament can do at the moment is stop Johnson effectively sneaking the country out of the EU with No Deal without any Parliamentary oversight, get that done and fight the election.

If Johnson wins the subsequent election he can do whatever he wants anyway, winning the election is the important bit

Of course. But delaying the election forces Johnson to write to the EU requesting an extension (I believe I read, the wording of that letter is defined in the bill), rips up his 'do or die' schtick, exposes his bluff on going to Brussels on 17/10 seeking an actual deal, refocuses the Brexit Party on fighting 'weak Tories' as well as Labour leave seats, and gives Labour time to prepare. The frenzy is there anyway.

[redmark]

"Special PLP just heard 'unanimous' view that MPs don't want any snap election until after Oct 31, one present tells me." (Huffpost's Paul Waugh)

Yep. The hints in the media are for public consumption - "we want an election ASAP". But after we've forced Johnson to request an extension is tactically astute.

[Zeb]

Yep. The hints in the media are for public consumption - "we want an election ASAP". But after we've forced Johnson to request an extension is tactically astute.

Just edited in Jim Pickard's take. Seems there's a disagreement with leadership over it. And agree, as said previously, that it would seem best for Labour and best for country. I mean, spending plans? Let's crack on then with detail and some scrutiny. Get the OBR to have a peek now there's time... Let Johnson twist. That's not a cabinet up for governing the country.

[redmark]

Are we likely to see a major upheaval of traditional voting this time where minority parties take the majority vote or is it going to be another hung parliament, coalition, nothing gets done situation?

Unless the fringe parties put forward enough viable candidates across the uk for people to vote for surely it'll end up more of the same?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

There were a couple of images I posted earlier - there are really a significant number of seats in the south which voted remain, or narrowly to leave, with 'wet' Tory MPs (many of whom have just lost the whip), which don't want a no deal. Some of those seats are fairly marginal (Labour or Lib Dem), others may prefer to vote for an independent Philip Hammond (for example) over a rabid Tory Brexiteer.

A Labour majority seems impossible (even if there's a swift change of leader). But a hung parliament with a smaller number of Tories (even including Brexit party) is a distinct possibility. Not a certainty, of course.

[redmark]

Just edited in Jim Pickard's take. Seems there's a disagreement with leadership over it. And agree, as said previously, that it would seem best for Labour and best for country. I mean, spending plans? Let's crack on then with detail and some scrutiny. Get the OBR to have a peek now there's time... Let Johnson twist. That's not a cabinet up for governing the country.

I wonder at what point the Tory leadership and pundits start to realise the prorogation may be about to play into his opponents hands?

[Zeb]

I wonder at what point the Tory leadership and pundits start to realise the prorogation may be about to play into his opponents hands?

Some pundits are there I think, just not those who want to call the horse race I suppose. Question I have is how long it's sustainable to 'govern' like this? So trade-offs need to come later in the year should this end up happening. Tory rebels and Lib Dems need to have a think. Labour need to take opportunity to detoxify. Last night was yet another good start for some but needs to be followed up, doesn't it?

[Snail]

The man is a fucking disgrace.

[redmark]

Some pundits are there I think, just not those who want to call the horse race I suppose. Question I have is how long it's sustainable to 'govern' like this? So trade-offs need to come later in the year should this end up happening. Tory rebels and Lib Dems need to have a think. Labour need to take opportunity to detoxify. Last night was yet another good start for some but needs to be followed up, doesn't it?

Yeah, conference becomes quite significant. If 'the project' sees this as a vindication of Corbyn's leadership and doubles down - trigger ballots, more 'support' for the likes of Williamson etc - an opportunity will have been thrown away. There's the chance of some reunification of the party here. Ideally, we secure the extension and an election date sometime in November - then conference is asked to rubber stamp an unopposed unity candidate as Corbyn steps down ('health reasons'). Even without that dream outcome, there are just little signs that Corbyn, McDonnell, Momentum etc are seeing the positives of party unity and even cross-party cooperation at the moment. Even the rhetoric between Swinson and the left has died down a bit. It will take some effort to maintain that through an election campaign, though.