Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

So it had previously been just the odd outlier - but Sky's tracker of the polls now has the Tories back to where they were with Truss - and I think it's been over a year since Labour had a smaller lead than 20%:


I expect this will tighten as we get to an election - although, maybe, people will just get more and more annoyed at the delay in calling one. I also don't believe those Reform numbers for one second.

But this is why, and I know the Canadians hate it, Canada 93 keeps coming up. Because I think at least since the war the basic assumption is that floor of either of the main parties is basically around 30% - I think Labour hit that in 2010 and the Tories in 97. I still think that's probably likely and where the Tories end up.....but they're plumbing polling depths that even IDS or Corbyn didn't get to.

[Josquius]

It does strike me reform voters are more likely to be out there online trying to game polling.
Though 10% of the country a bit fascy doesn't sound too off.

It's curious the lib dems have completely fumbled their chance. I guess everyone is just that sick of the tories they recognise its labour or them.

[Sheilbh]

It does strike me reform voters are more likely to be out there online trying to game polling.
Though 10% of the country a bit fascy doesn't sound too off.

Don't necessarily think they're trying to game anything - I think they're probably over-represented in people who are engaged in/interested in politics, so more likely to respond to a poll.

But I'm very dubious of the polling partly because they've never achieved actual votes in by-elections that their polling would imply (given those seats) and that I've never met anyone offline who knows anything about them.

Also I think in part it's precisely because the Lib Dems still haven't recovered as the protest party.

It's curious the lib dems have completely fumbled their chance. I guess everyone is just that sick of the tories they recognise its labour or them.

As I say I think entering government and the period of the coalition has just killed them as a protest party for a while. At some point they might recover (or maybe the Greens or Reform will take over) but if you're a "plague on both their houses" kind of voter I think the Lib Dems are probably still tainted.

Havinng said that I think they will do better in seats if not votes because I suspect there'll be a lot of tactical voting.

Thing I still don't get about the Lib Dems is why they haven't gone all in on being the "re-join" party. There's clearly a set of people, like a mirror of the Eurosceptics before the referendum, who think Europe is the most important issue. They already overlap with Lib Dem supporters - and they went into the 2019 election on a "bollocks to Brexit" platform of overturning/ignoring the referendum. It seems very, very strange that they've now started trimming.

[Sheilbh]

Liz Truss' attempts to go stateside to make money appear to be going swimmingly

Noel Stevenson
@Bodysatnav
Liz Truss on CNBC News has sought to clarify what she means by the deep state:  "It's deep, meaning a very long way down. We know it's there but obviously not exactly what it is because it's so deep. I mean really deep. But it's dangerous and working all the time to destabilise."

[HVC]

How'd she even work her way up to PM? How much worse was her competition?

[Sheilbh]

The slightly mad thing is that she was, I think, one of the longest serving cabinet ministers in the last 14 years.

I think it is probably not unrelated to the fact that she started as a Lib Dem (main interests: legalising pot and abolishing the monarchy). After she became a Tory, she was an ultra-Cameroon (very close to Osborne) and an enthusiastic campaigner for Remain. Then she embraced Brexit with the zeal of a convert, was a loyal member of May's government, followed by becoming a Johnson loyallist. And now talking about the "deep state" with Steve Bannon, doing events in the US and publishing a book aimed very much at the US with an enthusiastic blurb by Mike Lee (and a rather more ambiguous one by Johnson: "Liz Truss is right about one big thing" ).

[Tamas]

How much worse was her competition?

She was the okay candidate

[Josquius]

It does strike me reform voters are more likely to be out there online trying to game polling.
Though 10% of the country a bit fascy doesn't sound too off.

Don't necessarily think they're trying to game anything - I think they're probably over-represented in people who are engaged in/interested in politics, so more likely to respond to a poll.

But I'm very dubious of the polling partly because they've never achieved actual votes in by-elections that their polling would imply (given those seats) and that I've never met anyone offline who knows anything about them.

From what I've seen of their online behaviour I do think they actively target yougov et al thinking it means something. They've got a funny combination of being smart enough to realise how sampling works and how to cheat...but still believing absolute nonsense politics.

I don't get why reform changed their name. With brexit they had a name that really worked for them. They could really have profited from promising real brexit and all its unicorns are just round the corner. They could have embraced the way the term had warped from its actual meaning into becoming an article of faith for making everything better.
With Reform its almost like they're trying to target anti-brekshit folks.

Also I think in part it's precisely because the Lib Dems still haven't recovered as the protest party.

It's curious the lib dems have completely fumbled their chance. I guess everyone is just that sick of the tories they recognise its labour or them.

As I say I think entering government and the period of the coalition has just killed them as a protest party for a while. At some point they might recover (or maybe the Greens or Reform will take over) but if you're a "plague on both their houses" kind of voter I think the Lib Dems are probably still tainted.

Havinng said that I think they will do better in seats if not votes because I suspect there'll be a lot of tactical voting.

Thing I still don't get about the Lib Dems is why they haven't gone all in on being the "re-join" party. There's clearly a set of people, like a mirror of the Eurosceptics before the referendum, who think Europe is the most important issue. They already overlap with Lib Dem supporters - and they went into the 2019 election on a "bollocks to Brexit" platform of overturning/ignoring the referendum. It seems very, very strange that they've now started trimming.

I'd certainly consider voting for a Rejoin party- given I'm in a ultra safe Labour seat.
But yes. Big hole for the Lib Dems there. Its weird they're so anonymous on such matters.

Their other big opportunity was in targeting the "Conservative with a soul" vote that Johnson et al left behind with the lurch to the right. Though I do think Starmer has quite successfully closed a lot of that gap.

[garbon]

While I know polls have shown many think Brexit was bad idea, does anyone really want to open that wound again?

[Josquius]

While I know polls have shown many think Brexit was bad idea, does anyone really want to open that wound again?

Probably not yet. But give it a few years for more boomers to die and sure.
For the moment the target should be the brexit we were promised- a Swiss-style setup.

[Richard Hakluyt]

I think we will make a start under Starmer. A policy towards the EU that benefits the UK economically will also benefit the EU and will inevitably move the two parties closer together...so he should do that and not shout about it, just mention the benefits. Similarly we need to align with France/Germany/Poland on defence; we don't know how the US election will pan out but the days of reliance on the USA are effectively over (btw I also think we owe it to our ally to pull our weight anyway).

So a decade or two of pragmatic policies with our European neighbours before we think about applying to rejoin. It is still too close to 50/50 to think about now. I'd want it to be a regular 2:1 before we think about a reapplication. That would involve a very different UK with most of my generation and older deceased.

[Sheilbh]

While I know polls have shown many think Brexit was bad idea, does anyone really want to open that wound again?

I don't think it'd be a good idea for either of the main parties aiming for power - but I think there's space for a third party to back re-join. Although maybe that's it - the Lib Dems are still thinking about coalition and their last experience. They want to be in power and they don't want to have to negotiate their most totemic policy they're most emotionally invested in away again (student fees/re-join).

The other side for me is why the hardline re-join group who still organise protests etc haven't done some light entryism. The Lib Dems have under 100,000 members so it feels do-able

She was the okay candidate

Definitely part of it. Also she was the candidate telling Tories what they wanted to hear: "we can massively cut taxes without touching spending or doing anything else and grow our way out of it." While Sunak's pitch was very much "that's fucking mental!"

I think we will make a start under Starmer. A policy towards the EU that benefits the UK economically will also benefit the EU and will inevitably move the two parties closer together...so he should do that and not shout about it, just mention the benefits. Similarly we need to align with France/Germany/Poland on defence; we don't know how the US election will pan out but the days of reliance on the USA are effectively over (btw I also think we owe it to our ally to pull our weight anyway).

Maybe. I think the other side of this is what happens in European and world politics.

So I think it's fairly likely Starmer wins a large majority and Labour have at least a couple of terms - but obviously that may change, but that's sort of my assumption for Britain.

I don't kow what European politics will look like over the same period. For example it looks very plausible that Le Pen wins the Presidency in France - I think that would have a big impact here. But also we don't know in policy terms what a more Le Pen/Wilders/Meloni Europe would look like. I've mentioned before, but I think it's not impossible, that the UK becomes more liberal on race, immigration and cultural issues, while Europe moves in the opposite direction (we speak English - for better or worse, we're in America's discourse orbit ). But I think even away from policy Le Pen would make things politically difficult for a Labour government to engage with Europe (though we'd have to) - even Nigel Farage always refused to be in the same European party as Le Pen because of her perception here. As I say that might not happen.

The other risk, I think, is US-China relations. Because I think the EU is big enough to possibly try to chart a third way (I'm not sure it would be the right decision) and I think it's possible they might try to do that. The UK isn't and I think effectively (again we're in the orbit of America) we would have to follow the US. In the context of a trade war, which I think is possible, that would make it difficult to engage with Europe on policies if they're trying a independent, balancing role between the US and China.

Obviously those might not happen but I think they're very real possibilities in the next 10 years that would make things difficult. And, ironically, I slightly wonder if it's perhaps more likely if Biden wins re-election? I suspect a Trump victory would get the UK and EU talking and working together pretty quickly, but also I think Biden has been more effective on pushing policies v China - in part because it's the key part of Biden's "foreign policy for the middle class".

Having said all that, I think we're very likely to engage and have some sort of deeper relationship with the EU particularly on security very quickly. I think the UK and EU are absolutely aligned on Ukraine and Russia, I think both see the risk of US support dropping away and I think practically it's an area where the UK can help.

So a decade or two of pragmatic policies with our European neighbours before we think about applying to rejoin. It is still too close to 50/50 to think about now. I'd want it to be a regular 2:1 before we think about a reapplication. That would involve a very different UK with most of my generation and older deceased.

I'd go further. I think it needs to be a settled decision endorsed by both main parties. From the Treaty of Rome to about 1990 a significant chunk of Labour (and the trade unions) opposed being in the European Community leading to a referendum; and from 1990 a significant chunk of Tories opposed being in the EU leading to a referendum.

I think that built instability into the relationship and is, I believe, unique in Europe (it's one of the rare British exceptionalisms I think is a thing ). In other countries both main parties are basically pro-European - although I suppose this may shift over time with fragmentation.

The other, perhaps more optimistic possibility, is that the EU changes significantly in the next decade or two. I think it's 50/50 now but that falls dramatically if you talk about the Euro or I think Schengen. I think the other possibility is that Europe does integrate significantly in response to the climate crisis and Ukraine and what those require, which may be too much for Brits (and may, perhaps, only be possible because we left) - unless the EU formalises some form of multi-speed Europe as the French have always advocated.

[Tamas]

I am with RH. Starmer should do the sensible thing and as quietly as possible create a Norway/soft brexit situation. I think the populace would be a partner in keeping at all hush hush because most people have probably realised brexit was incredibly stupid but knowing that you have been taken for a ride and publicly admitting it are two different things. Especially when it is about the Great British Public.

[Admiral Yi]

51% of the country votes for Brexit and now 22% support the Tories.  Those are some impressive voters.

[Sheilbh]

I am with RH. Starmer should do the sensible thing and as quietly as possible create a Norway/soft brexit situation. I think the populace would be a partner in keeping at all hush hush because most people have probably realised brexit was incredibly stupid but knowing that you have been taken for a ride and publicly admitting it are two different things. Especially when it is about the Great British Public.

Can't see Norway being possible absent a referendum. I think free movement is the barrier as it was in the post-Brexit decisions.

I also think it's something, like the Euro or Schengen, that shifts the numbers significantly.

51% of the country votes for Brexit and now 22% support the Tories.  Those are some impressive voters.

I think this unironically - same with Tory support collapsing over partygate. We are all, unlike in the US, living in the same space in terms of public opinion and it reflects reality/things that happen.

Of course part of it is also that the Labour-Leave-Tory voters appear to have gone back to Labour, which is arguably a constraint on Labour's options (I'm not so sure).

But also voters are a lot less coherent than people who are interested in politics. UKIP's best result was 2015 (with about 12.5% of the vote), which was also the year the Lib Dem's collapsed. There was a not inconsiderable number of Lib Dem (Euro-federalist - although pro-referendum) to UKIP swing voters, which seems mad - but for some voters they were just the protest/"none of the above" party.