Conservative leadership election

[Epaminondas]

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

The reason the "no deal" plan has stalled is not because the law can't be passed. It's because it's currently undesirable at some many levels of UK society. The remainer MPs know that and don't want to follow the path of Cameron into political oblivion.

This sort of devious machinations could push some Tory MPs into Corbyn's cold arms for a VONC.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Yesterday I watched a video regarding prorogation as a way to get no deal passed.

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

Tell the EU to not give any extensions and just run out the clock. Put maybe a final "meaningful vote" on May's deal at 23:59 in the last day of before no deal. If it does not pass, it's no deal as the time has run out.

If May of all people got what, 2 days close to the deadline? Boris can easily just run out the clock on purpose.

Yes, but he doesn't get to do this in a vacuum - opponents of no deal (not least in his own party) will be trying everything possible to stop it happening.

Yeah, the point of prorogation is to prevent parliament from bringing down a government intent on running out the clock.

If Boris has a plan, I suspect it's something like:
try to renegotiate the WA -> refuse to extend -> bait parliament into blocking or revoking -> snap election -> unite leavers on a no deal platform -> win big majority -> use it to pass the WA

[LabourJersey]

Yesterday I watched a video regarding prorogation as a way to get no deal passed.

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

Tell the EU to not give any extensions and just run out the clock. Put maybe a final "meaningful vote" on May's deal at 23:59 in the last day of before no deal. If it does not pass, it's no deal as the time has run out.

If May of all people got what, 2 days close to the deadline? Boris can easily just run out the clock on purpose.

Yes, but he doesn't get to do this in a vacuum - opponents of no deal (not least in his own party) will be trying everything possible to stop it happening.

Yeah, the point of prorogation is to prevent parliament from bringing down a government intent on running out the clock.

If Boris has a plan, I suspect it's something like:
try to renegotiate the WA -> refuse to extend -> bait parliament into blocking or revoking -> snap election -> unite leavers on a no deal platform -> win big majority -> use it to pass the WA

That seems like a really risky plan. Though I guess Boris doesn't care

[CumbrianLefty]

Well he has been winging it most of his adult life, mostly with success thus far.

[cp]

Yesterday I watched a video regarding prorogation as a way to get no deal passed.

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

Tell the EU to not give any extensions and just run out the clock. Put maybe a final "meaningful vote" on May's deal at 23:59 in the last day of before no deal. If it does not pass, it's no deal as the time has run out.

If May of all people got what, 2 days close to the deadline? Boris can easily just run out the clock on purpose.

Yes, but he doesn't get to do this in a vacuum - opponents of no deal (not least in his own party) will be trying everything possible to stop it happening.

Yeah, the point of prorogation is to prevent parliament from bringing down a government intent on running out the clock.

If Boris has a plan, I suspect it's something like:
try to renegotiate the WA -> refuse to extend -> bait parliament into blocking or revoking -> snap election -> unite leavers on a no deal platform -> win big majority -> use it to pass the WA

That seems like a really risky plan. Though I guess Boris doesn't care

That part is the crux and probably the most likely reason such a gambit would fail. For all their bluster, the Tories' support for no deal when they've had to record a vote on it is ambivalent at best. They split almost in half on the no-deal indicative vote back in March and only 34 or so voted against May's deal the third time around, which ostensibly would have resulted in a no-deal if May hadn't asked for an extension (I know it's not that straightforward, but still).

A Tory Party pursuing no deal would likely see a few dozen MPs refuse to stand or pledge to oppose the manifesto, possibly leading to their deselection. Unless they made some arrangement with the Brexit Party (I think this is highly unlikely), it could produce a 'Canadian PCs in 1993' kind of meltdown.

[beesley]

As a Conservative supporter (not a member), I really hope Jeremy Hunt wins the election. Not because I'm one of the remainer Conservatives, but because I think he'd be a far better PM. He'd be more likely to get an improved Brexit deal, plus he'd lead the Conservatives so we get some reasonably effective governance for longer, rather than the next chapter of the Boris Johnson story. He might fail to unite them, but there are still a lot of Conservative MPs opposed to Boris too. You might disagree to the extent of Jeremy's achievements, but the idea that Boris has had so many great accomplishments is fantasy - he simply gets all the credit for things that happened during his term. - many good executives at TfL for example left at the end of Boris' mayoralty/at the beginning of Khan's mayoralty (partly due to dissatisfaction with the awful job Khan's doing.) His term as foreign secretary was not a great success. Hunt actually is prepared to be held to account, showing up to these debates and delivering more detailed policy ideas. He's also a family man and doesn't have all the domestic troubles - I know it's private, but it's still a quality. Unfortunately, I'm not sure Hunt can pull it off - there's a good chunk of the membership whose only idea of Brexit involves Boris Johnson, but who knows, it is British politics after all.

[brucejoel99]

As a Conservative supporter (not a member), I really hope Jeremy Hunt wins the election. Not because I'm one of the remainer Conservatives, but because I think he'd be a far better PM. He'd be more likely to get an improved Brexit deal, plus he'd lead the Conservatives so we get some reasonably effective governance for longer, rather than the next chapter of the Boris Johnson story. He might fail to unite them, but there are still a lot of Conservative MPs opposed to Boris too. You might disagree to the extent of Jeremy's achievements, but the idea that Boris has had so many great accomplishments is fantasy - he simply gets all the credit for things that happened during his term. - many good executives at TfL for example left at the end of Boris' mayoralty/at the beginning of Khan's mayoralty (partly due to dissatisfaction with the awful job Khan's doing.) His term as foreign secretary was not a great success. Hunt actually is prepared to be held to account, showing up to these debates and delivering more detailed policy ideas. He's also a family man and doesn't have all the domestic troubles - I know it's private, but it's still a quality. Unfortunately, I'm not sure Hunt can pull it off - there's a good chunk of the membership whose only idea of Brexit involves Boris Johnson, but who knows, it is British politics after all.

There is going to be no better Brexit deal. It is not happening. Patience with the British has run out in europe, even in this country where our government has traditionally been very open to british demands. Our papers are full of editorials essentially calling for Britain to **** off without a deal and let us move on. Even our infuential anglophile business associations are saying the Integrity of the Single Market is far more important than any British market. Europe is not exactly happy about a no deal but it has been preparing for it for more than a year. It can take no-deal, and will call the British bluff, if necessary. Any British politician telling you they will magically force consessions from the EU is selling you a pipe dream.

Otherwise full agreement with your post.

I mean, I'm as fed up with the British procrastinating as any political observer but EU diplomats have apparently been privately saying that, while the EU remains resistant to reopening the WA, they could still add to it in addition to potentially rewriting the political declaration on a future relationship & wrapping the whole thing up in a new umbrella deal, so it's hypothetically not out of the realm of possibility that we could see something that's marketed as "an improved Brexit deal" emerge out of all of this.

[LabourJersey]

Yesterday I watched a video regarding prorogation as a way to get no deal passed.

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

Tell the EU to not give any extensions and just run out the clock. Put maybe a final "meaningful vote" on May's deal at 23:59 in the last day of before no deal. If it does not pass, it's no deal as the time has run out.

If May of all people got what, 2 days close to the deadline? Boris can easily just run out the clock on purpose.

Yes, but he doesn't get to do this in a vacuum - opponents of no deal (not least in his own party) will be trying everything possible to stop it happening.

Yeah, the point of prorogation is to prevent parliament from bringing down a government intent on running out the clock.

If Boris has a plan, I suspect it's something like:
try to renegotiate the WA -> refuse to extend -> bait parliament into blocking or revoking -> snap election -> unite leavers on a no deal platform -> win big majority -> use it to pass the WA

That seems like a really risky plan. Though I guess Boris doesn't care

That part is the crux and probably the most likely reason such a gambit would fail. For all their bluster, the Tories' support for no deal when they've had to record a vote on it is ambivalent at best. They split almost in half on the no-deal indicative vote back in March and only 34 or so voted against May's deal the third time around, which ostensibly would have resulted in a no-deal if May hadn't asked for an extension (I know it's not that straightforward, but still).

A Tory Party pursuing no deal would likely see a few dozen MPs refuse to stand or pledge to oppose the manifesto, possibly leading to their deselection. Unless they made some arrangement with the Brexit Party (I think this is highly unlikely), it could produce a 'Canadian PCs in 1993' kind of meltdown.

That could probably be the most satisfying election result in a long, long time

[brucejoel99]

Yesterday I watched a video regarding prorogation as a way to get no deal passed.

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

Tell the EU to not give any extensions and just run out the clock. Put maybe a final "meaningful vote" on May's deal at 23:59 in the last day of before no deal. If it does not pass, it's no deal as the time has run out.

If May of all people got what, 2 days close to the deadline? Boris can easily just run out the clock on purpose.

Yes, but he doesn't get to do this in a vacuum - opponents of no deal (not least in his own party) will be trying everything possible to stop it happening.

Yeah, the point of prorogation is to prevent parliament from bringing down a government intent on running out the clock.

If Boris has a plan, I suspect it's something like:
try to renegotiate the WA -> refuse to extend -> bait parliament into blocking or revoking -> snap election -> unite leavers on a no deal platform -> win big majority -> use it to pass the WA

That seems like a really risky plan. Though I guess Boris doesn't care

That part is the crux and probably the most likely reason such a gambit would fail. For all their bluster, the Tories' support for no deal when they've had to record a vote on it is ambivalent at best. They split almost in half on the no-deal indicative vote back in March and only 34 or so voted against May's deal the third time around, which ostensibly would have resulted in a no-deal if May hadn't asked for an extension (I know it's not that straightforward, but still).

A Tory Party pursuing no deal would likely see a few dozen MPs refuse to stand or pledge to oppose the manifesto, possibly leading to their deselection. Unless they made some arrangement with the Brexit Party (I think this is highly unlikely), it could produce a 'Canadian PCs in 1993' kind of meltdown.

That could probably be the most satisfying election result in a long, long time

SNP as Her Majesty's Official Opposition when?

[beesley]

As a Conservative supporter (not a member), I really hope Jeremy Hunt wins the election. Not because I'm one of the remainer Conservatives, but because I think he'd be a far better PM. He'd be more likely to get an improved Brexit deal, plus he'd lead the Conservatives so we get some reasonably effective governance for longer, rather than the next chapter of the Boris Johnson story. He might fail to unite them, but there are still a lot of Conservative MPs opposed to Boris too. You might disagree to the extent of Jeremy's achievements, but the idea that Boris has had so many great accomplishments is fantasy - he simply gets all the credit for things that happened during his term. - many good executives at TfL for example left at the end of Boris' mayoralty/at the beginning of Khan's mayoralty (partly due to dissatisfaction with the awful job Khan's doing.) His term as foreign secretary was not a great success. Hunt actually is prepared to be held to account, showing up to these debates and delivering more detailed policy ideas. He's also a family man and doesn't have all the domestic troubles - I know it's private, but it's still a quality. Unfortunately, I'm not sure Hunt can pull it off - there's a good chunk of the membership whose only idea of Brexit involves Boris Johnson, but who knows, it is British politics after all.

There is going to be no better Brexit deal. It is not happening. Patience with the British has run out in europe, even in this country where our government has traditionally been very open to british demands. Our papers are full of editorials essentially calling for Britain to **** off without a deal and let us move on. Even our infuential anglophile business associations are saying the Integrity of the Single Market is far more important than any British market. Europe is not exactly happy about a no deal but it has been preparing for it for more than a year. It can take no-deal, and will call the British bluff, if necessary. Any British politician telling you they will magically force consessions from the EU is selling you a pipe dream.

Otherwise full agreement with your post.

I mean, I'm as fed up with the British procrastinating as any political observer but EU diplomats have apparently been privately saying that, while the EU remains resistant to reopening the WA, they could still add to it in addition to potentially rewriting the political declaration on a future relationship & wrapping the whole thing up in a new umbrella deal, so it's hypothetically not out of the realm of possibility that we could see something that's marketed as "an improved Brexit deal" emerge out of all of this.

Exactly. I understand that this leadership contest is taking far too long, but the resulting pressure to do something in the last few months should be spent doing something meaningful and attempting to change the circumstances. The pressure of no deal does exist now, and although it should be kept as an option, wouldn't it be at least better to aim for a new deal? If the EU don't budge on a deal, then they know what's coming. But if we at least want the chance to do better, we should at least pick a Prime Minister who has a chance of doing so.

[Famous Mortimer]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

[parochial boy]

There's a lot of magical thinking going on in this thread (and the British right more broadly). The EU has been pretty consistent on what it is willing to accept for the last three years, it's hard to see why the election of a man with a proven track record of being bad at his job is going to make them suddenly magically yield.

And any predictions on what it will mean for polling is speculatiion at best - maybe a couple of point bounce for the Tories post-election and then it really depends on how "the situation" evolves.

[cp]

Indeed. Unless one is inclined (or paid to) disbelieve everything the EU says and imagine the UK/Johnson can get what they want automatically, it's quite clear there's going to be no change in the Withdrawal Agreement.

Johnson may get a boost from winning the leadership race, but he's getting beaten up in the press pretty badly. He's also boxing himself in really tightly by stating over and over again that he can get a deal with the EU and that it will all be sorted by the end of October. That is totally unrealistic.

As for the likelihood of a 93-style meltdown, obviously it's just one potential outcome, but I think it's much more likely than Johnson getting a renegotiation, winning an election, and staying (becoming?) popular.

If nothing else the past few months have shown the people who have abandoned the Tories since March (remember, they've dropped from 40% to 18% in 12 weeks) will only flock back if 'Brexit gets done'. That only happens with a WA, which only happens with a backstop/payments/citizens rights guarantee, which a decent chunk of the Tory party - and all the DUP - will see as 'betrayal'. Johnson's probably smart enough not to bother trying that or trying for a no-deal exit on the 31st of October, so that only leaves an election ... without Brexit being 'done'.

If you had to imagine the scenario for a true Tory catastrophe in an election, this would be pretty close to fitting the bill.

[DaWN]

I'm really not sure where this stuff about Boris bring popular comes from. He really isn't the Great Tory Saviour. Sure, he'll get a honeymoon period but it'll probably be short and the backlash brutal.

Of course, they also won't end up being the Canadian PCs for a number of reasons, chiefly that Jeremy Corbyn is no Jean Chretien.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I think the easiest solution for the tories would be a new election with either the WA or no deal in their manifesto, so they can deselect any member unable to support the manifesto plan and possibly hatch out a pact with Farage.

[cp]

I'm really not sure where this stuff about Boris bring popular comes from. He really isn't the Great Tory Saviour. Sure, he'll get a honeymoon period but it'll probably be short and the backlash brutal.

Of course, they also won't end up being the Canadian PCs for a number of reasons, chiefly that Jeremy Corbyn is no Jean Chretien.

If it turns out that way, I'd say the more likely reason a Tory meltdown doesn't reach PC-93 proportions is because of structural factors in the party's vote rather than the personality of the opposition leader.

The PC's in 1993 had no equivalent of the Home Counties and rural/countryside seats the Tories currently hold and that aren't being challenged by the Brexit Party (who are mostly challenging seats in the East, Midlands, and post-industrial North) or the Lib Dems (who are mostly challenging seats in the West and urban areas). There's probably a core of about 50-75 Tory seats that wouldn't fall to any other party, unless they sank to single digits nationally.

It's also worth keeping in mind how little regard Jean Chretien received in the non-francophone press before becoming PM. Like Corbyn now, a lot of the people supposedly in the know and close to power completely wrote him off.

[cp]

I think the easiest solution for the tories would be a new election with either the WA or no deal in their manifesto, so they can deselect any member unable to support the manifesto plan and possibly hatch out a pact with Farage.

Easier said than done. A manifesto with the WA in it would be unsupportable by a significant portion of current MPs and a poison pill for any pact with Farage. A manifesto with no deal in it *might* win over Farage (I think he's too vainglorious to agree to anything but the most cosmetic of electoral pacts), but it would certainly alienate the remaining moderate wing of the party. The Tories could, theoretically, emerge the largest party from such an election, but it's very difficult to see how they could get a majority in the House.

[Oryxslayer]

I think you guys are stuck in your own personal biases, which is understandable considering who exactly Boris is. You need to look past these biases, look past the polling (which I will deconstruct in a moment), and look at the fundamentals right now. As much as I hate it, the fundamentals point to Boris winning the next election, perhaps by a good amount.

Okay, so why do you say loo at the fundamentals? Well, both the parties and the country right now are in a period of realignment. Close to 50% of the country is up in the air with some prior party loyalties but limited attachment now. The polling therefore, while accurately reflecting the situation presently, will likely not reflect the situation in an election environment. They will probably not even reflect the situation in a month. This is not even talking about the seat projections, which can be just tossed straight out the window. With so many voters in the air, and such a limited idea of where they are up in the air, no party may have any strongholds left. We can place reasonable guesses - Lib Dems Greater London and suburbs, Brexit E/NE for instance, but they will just be that, guesses.

So what exactly are the fundamentals. Well first there is Boris. He is a man cut from the cloth of the polarizing atmosphere that seems so prevalent in the modern world. Being and remaining PM is his primary goal, and to do that he has and will exploit every wedge issue or polarizing phenomenon. it has mostly been successful; yesterday YouGov came out with a poll asking if Boris should answer for the recent allegations. Those who would never vote for a Tory - 80-20 he should answer. Those who did last cycle - 75-25 he should refuse. It is important to remember that the Tories also have control of the leavers of power - they decide policy and what direction popular issues are going to take.

Next up there is Farage and the Brexit party. Overall, the Brexit party has three big weaknesses that will shape their future. First off, the Brexit and UKIP have always been one man projects. Nobody cares about Brexit candidates X, Y, and Z, its all about Farage. This is a good thing when one is running a personal campaign across the nation, think the EU elections. But when one has to run on a seat by seat basis and put out manifestos...he has floundered. See UKIPs track record of only ever getting a Tory defector elected. See Peterborough, a top 100 leave seat giving Brexit a poor result. His best result was the brexit referendum, once again a national campaign. This flows naturally into the second problem which is a lack of MPs. No MPs, no influence on the debate. Farage can only scream from the sidelines and change the issues, not actually see them to fulfillment. Finally, the greatest problem for the Brexit party is time. The further the EU result seeps into the past, the more  the Brexit party struggles to argue for its existence. The party has and will fail in the by-elections, the party appears as a sore loser appealing the Peterborough result right now, the party will have to contend with Boris occupying the same ideological position as them soon enough.

Finally, there is the opposition. Labour has a fundamental problem that all the initiative appears to be with the Lib-Dems. The lib-Dems are getting a new leader while Labour is stuck with corbyn. The Lib-dems continue to drive the Remain debate further to the extremes, and Labour is playing catch up. Labour of course cannot take the most extreme position at whatever time - partly because Corbyn, partly because of their northern voters. The Lib-dems are going to have a good result in the  Brecon and Radnorshire by-election, either winning it or coming close. Labour and the Lib-Dems teaming up, to form a joint 'Progressive Alliance' is impossible considering how the CHUK defectors are being 'admired' to the Lib-Dems, and that's ignoring the ideological distance on issues more pressing to corbyn. Therefore, there will always be two remain parties - one for the partisans and one stuck between a remain base and a leave leader.

So what is the likely outcome of these fundamentals? Well, since Boris wants to keep the PM office, he has and will embrace the position of the majority of the electorate on the right, a position carved out by the Brexit party changing the debate. No deal. Maybe not immediately, but unless the EU gives him what he wants, Boris will do what it takes to win (and keep his coveted PM job) and hug the Brexit Party to death. Whats the point after all of a party out of power, a party that has failed to win, a party that's whole message is one that has now been coopted by the party of power? Especially once the Remain Tories revolt (and then get deselected) in October, leaving Boris's Conservatives as the sole, pure, ideological pillar in Westminster defending the option held by a (~40%, another YouGov Poll) plurality of the electorate. The ideological distance betwen Brexit and the Conservatives is not momentous, and considering how easy it was for the tories to 'endorse' Brexit in the EU elections, think about how easy it will be for voters to return. This in many ways is the fate of national-campaign third parties in FPTP elections, they change the debate by forcing the big two to adjust their positions towards yours to win your voters, but can never get elected on their own merits.

On the other side of the coin, there cannot be the consolidation seen among the Leave voters. The gap as stated is far wider between Labour and the Lib-Dems, and the Lib-Dems have MPs right now to prove their viability. If the electorate continues to polarize, Labour is trapped between the Lib-Dems occupying a position they cannot take, and the Leave front to their right. And any election caused by the government failing to obtain No Deal will be purely on Brexit alone, its Brexit position verses the rest. But this situation is only if polarization continues, and Labour has some loyal voters in parts of London and the North who would never desert for the Lib-Dems or would never go for a hard Remain party.

So we are left with a situation that while chaotic, has some fundamentals that point towards a band of specific outcomes. There is a reason why the EU is now preparing for No Deal, they have similarly ran the calculus and found that the Tories crashing out right now or another GE producing a unified  Leave front are the likely options. Its a sorry situation, I hate it as someone who backed remain, but its just the direction I see things going. Especially since parliamentary brexit so far has been a tale of people pursuing their rational (Game Theory wise) interests, and Boris's rational interest right now is just to win, win, win, whatever the cost may be.

I needed to get that off my chest as someone who has been watching this sh**t for a long time, and has no horse in the race.

[Zinneke]

Your post is insightful but for the fact that I don't think you can take a Corbyn leadership for granted given the insurgency he is facing from the Remainer Left. From the rumours I heard it looks like Rebeeca Long-Bailey could be put forward as the young female Remainer candidate with McDonnell as the puppet master. Corbyn has lost his internal perceived invincibility entirely over the Brexit issue.

[Epaminondas]

As much as I hate it, the fundamentals point to Boris winning the next election, perhaps by a good amount.

That's very possible, but if the Brexit party splinters the Conservative vote like in Peterborough at the next general, it could all come crashing down.
Why would single-issue voters choose the substitude (Cons) over the real deal (Brexit party)?

Boris is british Trump in his showmanship, his lack of control and his fickleness.
That isn't a recipe for political success in the UK.

[CumbrianLefty]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

[Famous Mortimer]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen. Although I still think it could, with pretty much everything else I predicted remaining the same.

[cp]

Gosh, Oryxslayer, that's a lot to take in. You're right that there's a great deal of flux in voting intentions right now, and that Brexit is driving that flux, but the 'fundamentals' you've chosen to focus on are neither the whole story nor necessarily predictive of the outcome you forecast.

Firstly, the fundamentals you identify (Johnson's incumbency/ambition; the ephemeral nature of the Brexit Party; the Lib/Lab Remainer split) are not the only structural factors defining the political landscape. Some others worth considering:

- The economy/austerity: the 2017 election showed quite clearly that the country was much less receptive to Tory economic policies than most people assumed. Anger over austerity, Universal Credit, and cuts to education and health care is palpable and the Tories have zero credibility on the issue. 2017 also showed that no matter how large Brexit might loom as an issue, a general election can and will address other issues, and voters will decide whom to support for a wide variety of reasons.

- Incumbency: winning 4 elections in a row is a tall order in the best of times. Doing so while failing to resolve the most pressing issue of the day (that the incumbent party initiated) invites skepticism as to that party's ability to succeed.

Secondly, assuming Johnson/Brexit/Corbyn are the major factors in determining the next election, I don't think your account of them is altogether perceptive.

For starters, Johnson being ambitious and being willing to cling to power by the last atoms of his fingernails is nothing new, nor does it distinguish him from any other leader of the Tories.

Meanwhile, I don't think your read on the Brexit Party is accurate. So long as Brexit remains unresolved, which is to say the UK has not left the EU with no-deal or a Malthouse Compromise style revamped WA, the Brexit Party's raison d'etre will be undiminished. Even if Johnson swears he will go for a no-deal Brexit, before or after October 31st, Farage and the diehard Leavers will (prudently) deduce that he is more likely to actually follow through on it if they keep the pressure on. That means running in a GE, splitting the Leaver-sympathetic vote just as badly, if not worse, than the Lib/Lab split of the Remainer vote.

Finally, there are a lot of problems with Corbyn's Brexit policy, but all evidence suggests that he'll inch close enough to a Remain position in the next few months to give just enough cover to diehard Remainers (as well as diehard anti-Tories who aren't already pro-Labour) to keep his voter base together. The Lib Dem surge from the local/EU elections is unlikely to be replicated in a GE for largely the same reasons UKIP got 27% in the 2014 EU election and 8% in the 2015 GE.

Something worth keeping in mind: Johnson's modus operandi has always been to make a big show but do as little as possible. That works for becoming mayor, or getting elected as an MP, and it may even be enough to get elected as leader of the Tories. But it will be utterly useless at changing the  the Irish trilemma, the EU's insistence on the WA, and the lack of a parliamentary majority. Those 'fundamentals' will remain unaltered no matter how much Johnson blusters.

Put another way: nothing has changed.

[CumbrianLefty]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen. Although I still think it could, with pretty much everything else I predicted remaining the same.

I see, so completely delusional wishful thinking then

[cp]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen. Although I still think it could, with pretty much everything else I predicted remaining the same.

I see, so completely delusional wishful thinking then

Be nice, you two!