Westministenders: High Drama at The Ok Coral

[RedToothBrush]

3:00 p.m. Wednesday, October 26, 1881, Tombstone, Arizona.

After months of death threats from the Cowboy Billys, their long simmering feud with the law thing came to a head. The Earp Brothers and Doc Holliday faced the criminals down in a shootout.

Tomorrow's 'sleepover' is starting to feel like the Gunfight at the OK Coral.

The outcome of the real story was three of the outlaws were killed. Another two claimed they were unarmed and ran from the fight. Virgil, Morgan, and Doc Holliday were wounded, but Wyatt Earp was unharmed.

How many Brexiteers can we expect to roll over and resign from the Cabinet and how many will surrender to May and the Pro-Business lobby? ONly time will tell.

Please place your bets for the number of resignations and the number of 'I support the PM' comments.

But don't get too excited. The showdown wasn't the end of the matter.

One of the outlaws who legged it, filed murder charges against the Earps and Doc Holliday. It took them some time for them to be acquitted.

Then Virgil Earp was ambushed and disabled in the arm later that year in December and Morgan Earp was assassinated in March 1882. Wyatt Earp, then thinking he had no other option, went on a personal vendetta to kill the outlaws and then fled the state.

Given the Tory Cabinet and the perchant for stabbing each other in the back and settling personal scores, a repeat of a wild west gun fight, really doesn't sound too wildly off the cards now does it?

Buckle up. Its time to play at Chequers.

It's a war all right. DGR I'd probably be a 'nationalist' too, if I was a bloke.

I would probably be an extreme remainer! I like the idea of a more federal Europe - would even like to be part of a United States of Europe, albeit in an idealistic know it will never happen kind of way.

When it was looming on the cards (Maastricht) the late, much missed Tony Benn made some very interesting and learned points about different ways countries can develop a wider union ... "federal" is just one, and not necessarily the best. There are volumes of writings on the US system which highlight it's shortcomings. One of which is how on earth can you put states California (which is effectively a country in it's own right) and Vermont in the same political system ?
Incidentally, Benn suggested a European Commonwealth (notes that not all constituent parts of the US are states - there are some commonwealths too).

One of the things Trump appealed to was some peoples dislike of the over-involvement of federal government in state affairs.

Even within the UK we see the problems of trying to combine two countries, a principality and a province into a working political framework.

As pointedly pointed out upthread, European Federal fanatics aren't mainstream. But they exist ... I'm pretty certain the LibDems have had their moments when they've backed initiatives aimed at being vaguely federal.

a senior Russian official saying that Russia doesn't have to explain the deaths of alcoholics and drug takers

I was just going to write that I could never imagine a British Foreign secretary saying that ...

But these people were not a vocal part of the discussion around the EU referendum. There are no members of parliament espousing these viewpoints - nor do they get any kind of air time. All that wikipedia article proves is that this isn't a movement like UKIP and is largely historical. It literally say 'other than the vague aim of 'ever closer union' (declaration from 1983) the union has no current policy to create a federal state.'
There is mention of the Pan European movement from the 1920s - and absolutely nothing current.

It is misleading (if not a downright lie) to pretend that 'extreme remainers' are a part of this the way brexiteers are, that there is a shadowy cabal similar to ukip who want to bring this about in the UK - who may end up in govt.

And yes bringing them up, like they are a genuine part of all this is downright dangerous just as people are waking up to the shitshow that is going on. You're going to frighten people back into a 'well we're better out because we don't want be that' stance - and that will be disastrous for the economy and security and everything else we talk about.

There are no 'extreme remainers (as you call them) in parliament. Therefore there is no danger of them ending up in a coalition. so no - your line about them not being able to get on in a coalition isn't honesty it's a complete hypothetical.

Giving people honest information is important - but is also has to be accurate. Yes, I'm sure 'extreme remainers' exist. No they don't have any power in this country - so don't make it sound - to people who are just waking up to all this - that they are a credible threat because they're not That isn't being honest - it's being disingenuous and it is a deeply deeply stupid thing to do at a critical juncture.

You can just imagine a British foreign secretary saying nothing DGR

Oh wait, you don't have to.

a senior Russian official saying that Russia doesn't have to explain the deaths of alcoholics and drug takers

Methinks this is rather churlish and excessively defensive. Wouldn't a more normal innocent diplomatic response be to say something along the lines of....

" The Russian government understands there has been unexplained deaths in the Wiltshire area and extends its sympathy to the U.K. especially to the families of those affected."

There are no 'extreme remainers ..

It is a constant mystery to me, the extent to which most remainers are not extreme. Most are prepared to acquiesce and even seem grateful for any softer type of exit. This is despite the insight and clarity that we are relinquishing what was an excellent and profitable arrangement and one in which we were one of the dominant leading parties.

Here we go.

@rosskempsell
EXC: Letter of no confidence in the PM submitted by Tory backbencher Andrew Bridgen - first publicly confirmed that we have seen

Just seen a friend post this not sure if he stole it from elsewhere on Facebook.

Dominic Raab our new Brexit secretary, is an anagram of "mid air bacon" which is very apt for someone tasked with carrying out a policy that could only work, when pigs fly..........

What a stupid letter! They really ought to be distancing themselves from the phrase 'brexit means brexit.' 'undefined item means undefined item' does nothing to move the country forward or to reassure people, who can think in longer chunks than soundbites, that all will be well. How can it when it has a circular definition?

And it isn't failure to deliver brexit that will punish them in the polls - it is the sleaze, and the infighting, and the incompetence and austerity, and the hostile environment, the loss of businesses from the UK, the threats to the Irish peace process, the grinding down of the nhs, and their promising the undeliverable and then tearing the country apart in their civil war - as they decide whether it is better to admit they lied or just drag the whole nation into an economic abyss that we won't climb out of for a generation ... that will see them punished at the polls.

And whilst Theresa May has more than played her part - getting rid of her won't help them any.
I hope it destroys them completely.

I seem to remember the last thing Peston predicted was quite the opposite to what happened. I can't remember what it was though.

I am not likely this quiet.

I have a horrible feeling about it.

Especially since Trump has stuck his oar in. What happens if they hold on until he arrives, knowing that May will be busy dealing with him? And thus gives him a very good excuse to pull a stunt and meet with Johnson? Or Smug?

It feels like there is something BIG about to break, especially since there is a sense that the Hard Brexiteers have somehow 'lost' from some quarters

Laura Kuenssberg @bbclaurak
1. A help to May? - Varadkar says "if the UK is able to relax from some of its red lines, then the European Union should be flexible too. I think perhaps we are now entering into that space."
2. But just as Trump says how big a friend he is of Boris Johnson - eek, not embarrassing at all

Lucy Fisher @LOS_Fisher
Foreign Office officials yesterday cracked open champagne they'd set aside for Boris Johnson's exit, which they nicknamed "liberation day", according to a Whitehall source

Britain Elects @britainelects
On who would make best Prime Minister:

T. May: 34%
J. Corbyn: 27%

Not sure: 36%

via @YouGov, 08 - 09 Jul

prettybird

Does seem sad that these england loving brexists haven't quite got the hang of the language, pretzels I agree.

'Extreme remainer' sounds a bit rude. Villification is usually one of the staging posts along the way in this type of political trajectory. It usually escalates, sadly.

So "not sure" beats the incumbent and challenger ?

In any other time, that would sent shockwaves through the press. MORE PEOPLE ARE UNCERTAIN THAN CERTAIN

However, it's built on that problem that a lot of Remainers simply have no choice between Labour and Tory. Which validates the suggestion that a General Election is unlikely to move us into a majority government.

Be curious to know what seasoned pundits would make if the next GE - whenever it is - delivered pretty much what we have now ?

The problem with the 'who do you think would make the best PM' question is how literally are the people asking taking it? I do not believe JC will be a good PM. I don't believe he would be better than TM. But, nevertheless, i believe that TM is abysmal and I would not vote for the tories. I would probably vote for labour as my seat is a marginal.

So whilst my answer to that question would probably be TM - it does not translate into a vote or any confidence in her. Though it probably does help demonstrate how desperately labour need to get rid of JC.

No wonder don't know is winning.

Matthew Goodwin @GoodwinMJ
Inside the minds of Conservative Party voters - a thread

We seem to be talking a lot about what Conservative MPs want but not a lot about what Conservative voters want

One of the reasons that many in Britain have been repeatedly shocked by political change -Ukip, Corbyn, Brexit- is because they've not been paying sufficient attention to public opinion & voters

The seeds of future revolts have already been planted

The following draws on some work out today using the British Social Attitudes survey & @whatukthinks and some bits I've been doing for @jrf_uk and others

First, Conservative voters today are far more pro-Leave than they were only 3 years ago Large majority just want out

Second, they've become far more gloomy about how immigration is changing Britain Fewer than 1 in 4 think it is enriching the nation's cultural life

Third, when given the option "free movement for free trade?" an overwhelming majority say no Most want free movement to stop

Might be tempting to think these views might change or that these voters could be won over by a clever campaign or policy pitch...

That's very unlikely. Because we are talking about people's values, or the elephant that is driving the rider, and those instincts don't really change. For example...

This is what's happened to the Conservative Party electorate in terms of those values It's become far more socially conservative or 'authoritarian'

So whilst my answer to that question would probably be TM - it does not translate into a vote or any confidence in her. Though it probably does help demonstrate how desperately labour need to get rid of JC.

But is it not the case that UK democracy generally does roll everything into a single vote ? It's certainly why I'm not voting Labour - I don't want anyone claiming that my vote was a vote for . Just look at the way a vote to Leave become a vote for whatever people claimed it was.

It's also why I'm not a supporter of a "peoples vote", if the vote in question is between two choices I fundamentally disagree with.

It's all a little "When did you last beat your wife ?"

Lonelyplanetmum - exactly. There are so many other things that the Russians could have said.

Maybe Hunt will bring his acquired medical knowledge to bear on his new role and tackle the Russians head on? (Or maybe he has to wait until the England football team and supporters are all safely home)

Though it probably does help demonstrate how desperately labour need to get rid of JC

but isn't he there by the will of the Labour membership ?

Blimey Red, this thread's nearly full already! in large part because of the GFery from certain quarters yesterday

I voted Remain (or Yes) as an 18yr-old, back in the 1974 referendum;
part of the reason was indeed because I wanted a United States of Europe

I was fed up with parochial national politics and wanted to use the combined talents of several countries, to find a better way of doing things.

The USE can only come about and be stable when like-minded countries naturally grow closer and closer;
if this doesn't happen, there is no point in trying to force closeness and it would be unethical anyway.

I would want a very high % agreement - at least 70% - in each country that joins the USE, plus agreed in advance a very clear constitution and the rights and responsibilities of member states.

So, I may be an "extreme" Remainer, but unlike the Brexiters I would not advocate my aims, until there is overwhelming consent for them
Naturally, there would be years of detailled planning first !
And of course, I wouldn't declare opponents to be Enemies of the People, or allow them to be intimidated.

Far from wishing to force Brits to Remain, I've always opposed a 2nd referendum
and I would probably oppose the Uk being allowed to rejoin after a Brexit crash
Referenda on in / out are fundamental, quite unlike votes on treaties, for which the terms can be changed if the voters choose.

The EU has never advocated re-runs of countries voting whether to join, e.g. Norway, Switzerland
And it would be inconsistent to want to re-run a vote on leaving

Although I wanted the UK to choose Remain, I think at this stage there is no going back - too many bridges have been burnt by this govt
The UK has always blocked progress in the social chapter and towards greater harmony
It has often - under Tory govts - been a wrecker

imo, the Uk should only be allowed to revoke A50, or rejoin via A49, if there is a very large majority for this
- a genuine enthusiasm for being in the EU, not just grudging acquiescence to avoid the UK economy crashing.

Back in 1974, we were disappointed that the vote was just under 2:1
and we saw that didn't last. So, I would want a higher vote than that

There is a suitable place for the UK, or whatever is left of it after no-deal Brexit:
Norway ++ (SM+CU) could be negotiated to provide all the desired economic benefits, but the May's red lines would all have to go.

However, a future UK govt needs to balance benefits vs responsibilities / rules for each of the possible relationships with the EU:
Canada Dry, Canada Plus, Ukraine, Norway, Norway++
then pick one, explain why to the population and explain the required compromises.

What a stupid letter!

Agreed. I find myself on the unutterably bizarre position of defending the PM.

Yet again Brexiteers can only speak in meaningless generalisations. Despite being very short this letter is full of absurdity.

•sticking to Brexit means Brexit.

FFS then define it. Come up with a bloody plan Mr Bridgen. You've and your mates have had two years and produced zip, zilch, zero. Bxshit it is a made up word with any number of interpretations.

•take back control of our money, borders and laws.

You mean 0.7% of GDP. (We always had control of 99.3%.) Borders ditto we always had control we never exercised. As for laws you mean goods and food regs do you ? We always had control over all the important stuff.

•intended to dupe the electorate, which is an insult to their intelligence.

Errrr hello. What like every lie the leave campaign uttered to dupe the electorate.

I have no confidence in Mr Brigden -who incidentally is one of those antediluvians voting against gay rights and marriage but for reducing benefits etc.

borntobequiet

"There's a series of comedy spy/thriller stories written by Mick Herron (sp?) featuring a range of incompetent, immoral and/or self interested operatives and some instantly recognisable politicians (Boris), all trying to wreak havoc to their own advantage.
The Skripal poisoning and its aftermath struck me from the first as more like one of these plots than real life (the first in the series is called Slow Horses)."

Mick Herron's Slough House series is wonderful - I'm currently reading them all for the second time. As you say, he skewers a number of instantly recognisable politicans (and journalists - Dodie Gumball is Gove's wife Sarah Vine to a T). His occasional barbed inserts show him quite clearly to be a remainer (with absolutely no patience with venal and incompetent politicos).

Put Jackson Lamb in charge of the present shitstorm and he'd have exposed the leave campaign as a mendacious shambles and have his feet back on the desk in no time.

Sorry for the slow (ha!) response, but this thread is thundering along again and I have to eat occasionally.

order-order.com/2018/07/10/brexiteers-turn-erg-whatsapp-group/
Brexiteers Turn On Each Other in ERG WhatsApp Group

Brexiteer Tory MPs are turning on each other in the ERG WhatsApp group as they split into two factions: those supporting and those opposing Theresa May’s deal. Laurence Robertson, who opposes the government’s Brexit plan, accused those backing the PM of being “sycophants and careerists” and warned “battle lines” are being drawn. Strong language which is not going down well with those on the other side of the party…

Must admit I DO like this comment:

Philip Davies lambasted colleagues in safe seats who are backing the PM, accusing them of “not giving a stuff” about those in Leave-voting marginals

Phillip Davies would be near the top of my list of 'MPs you hope never ever are seen in parliament again'.

But is it not the case that UK democracy generally does roll everything into a single vote ? It's certainly why I'm not voting Labour - I don't want anyone claiming that my vote was a vote for . Just look at the way a vote to Leave become a vote for whatever people claimed it was.

I agree - I was very angry with the '80% of the electorate voted for a brexit party' line - and ideally I would love to vote lib dem. However my tory mp sits on a majority smaller than Amber Rudds and is a brexiteer. I really don't want to vote labour - but in my particular constituency it could eject a headbanger from parliament. A vote to the lib dems (unless there has been a major upheaval in the community that no one has told me about since last year ) is just handing the seat back to dickhead who currently has it.

This is why I am desperately hoping there will not be another election. I don't want to vote labour - but I feel it is the best option in my constituency.

It's also why I'm not a supporter of a "peoples vote", if the vote in question is between two choices I fundamentally disagree with.

If the choice was between accepting the deal and crashing out, then I would spoil my ballot paper - fully in the knowledge that that would make crash out more likely to win, and the result would be disastrous. But I am not being counted as having 'voted for brexit' in any guise. Not in my name.
My mother, however - given those two options - will set fire to the polling station.