What is the point of a new vote on May's deal when the indicative votes suggest she will not win? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat will go on new post boxes when Prince Charles becomes king?What can UK citizens do to replace first past the post with a proportional representation voting system?What is the point of unlimited terms?If, on 12 December, the House of Commons passes, by a simple majority, a vote of “no confidence” in Theresa May's government, what happens next?Would a Government who lose the confidence of the House really delay an election until after the event over which that confidence was lost transpires?Does “government” mean something different in British and American English?How did Theresa May remain PM after her Brexit deal was rejected?What will happen if Parliament votes “no” on each of the Brexit-related votes to be held on the 12th, 13th and 14th of March?Whose support is needed for May to win the vote?Can Remain win a second referendum purely because many Leavers are dead?
Robert Sheckley short story about vacation spots being overwhelmed
How do I get the green key off the shelf in the Dobby level of Lego Harry Potter 2?
Only print output after finding pattern
Shade part of a Venn diagram
How do scammers retract money, while you can’t?
I believe this to be a fraud - hired, then asked to cash check and send cash as Bitcoin
When Does an Atlas Uniquely Define a Manifold?
Failed to fetch jessie backports repository
Why do professional authors make "consistency" mistakes? And how to avoid them?
Can a caster that cast Polymorph on themselves stop concentrating at any point even if their Int is low?
Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)
Does the Brexit deal have to be agreed by both Houses?
How should I support this large drywall patch?
What is the purpose of the Evocation wizard's Potent Cantrip feature?
Implement the Thanos sorting algorithm
Why here is plural "We went to the movies last night."
Whats the best way to handle refactoring a big file?
How can I open an app using Terminal?
MAZDA 3 2006 (UK) - poor acceleration then takes off at 3250 revs
Are there languages with no euphemisms?
WOW air has ceased operation, can I get my tickets refunded?
Opposite of a diet
How to Reset Passwords on Multiple Websites Easily?
Why did we only see the N-1 starfighters in one film?
What is the point of a new vote on May's deal when the indicative votes suggest she will not win?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowWhat will go on new post boxes when Prince Charles becomes king?What can UK citizens do to replace first past the post with a proportional representation voting system?What is the point of unlimited terms?If, on 12 December, the House of Commons passes, by a simple majority, a vote of “no confidence” in Theresa May's government, what happens next?Would a Government who lose the confidence of the House really delay an election until after the event over which that confidence was lost transpires?Does “government” mean something different in British and American English?How did Theresa May remain PM after her Brexit deal was rejected?What will happen if Parliament votes “no” on each of the Brexit-related votes to be held on the 12th, 13th and 14th of March?Whose support is needed for May to win the vote?Can Remain win a second referendum purely because many Leavers are dead?
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
New contributor
add a comment |
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
New contributor
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
15 hours ago
3
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
12 hours ago
add a comment |
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
New contributor
So I am hearing that May wants another vote on her deal tomorrow.
When she held her last vote recently, 391 voted against and only 242 voted for.
Yesterday, indicative votes were held. Here are the results.
So, about 268 support a referendum. So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held.
However, most importantly, 160 voted in favor of no-deal, and there is no overlap between this group and those that want a new referendum (one group is many Labor-party, the other group is mainly Conservatives). These must be those Conservatives who dislike May's deal so much that they'd rather embrace a no-deal. So they will vote against her too.
160 + 268 = 428 votes against her deal. So the indicative votes suggest that she has pretty much already lost. Even if 1 hundred of those who prefer no-deal to May's deal changed their mind, May still wouldn't win.
So why does she want another vote when it is clear it cannot win?
.
united-kingdom theresa-may
united-kingdom theresa-may
New contributor
New contributor
edited 14 hours ago
Brythan
69.9k8146237
69.9k8146237
New contributor
asked 15 hours ago
PaliPali
513
513
New contributor
New contributor
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
15 hours ago
3
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
12 hours ago
add a comment |
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
15 hours ago
3
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
12 hours ago
6
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
15 hours ago
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
15 hours ago
3
3
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
12 hours ago
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
12 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
1
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
add a comment |
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "475"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Pali is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39925%2fwhat-is-the-point-of-a-new-vote-on-mays-deal-when-the-indicative-votes-suggest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
1
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
add a comment |
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
1
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
add a comment |
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
The elephant in the room here is the conclusion of meeting of the European Council last week, in response to the UK's request to extend the Article 50 negotiation period beyond the 29th March. The third bullet point is the relevant one here:
- The European Council agrees to an extension until 22 May 2019, provided the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons next week. If the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons next week, the European Council agrees to an extension until 12 April 2019 and expects the United Kingdom to indicate a way forward before this date for consideration by the European Council.
This effectively makes Friday the 29th into a mini deadline to do something which can be presented to the European Council as House of Commons approval of the withdrawal agreement. Precisely what this is going to be won't be clear until the Government announces precisely what motion is to be debated and voted on, but given the previous decisions by the Commons Speaker John Bercow, it's conceivable this won't actually be the same vote as last time.
answered 14 hours ago
origimboorigimbo
12.7k23251
12.7k23251
1
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
1
1
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
Update: Bercow has considered the motion and decided it is sufficiently different.
– Steve Jessop
5 hours ago
add a comment |
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
add a comment |
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
add a comment |
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
It's not clear that supporters of no-deal will refuse to back May's deal at the 3rd time of asking. The indicative votes in particular allowed MPs to support several positions, some of which are mutually contradictory. If given a choice between deal vs remain then some of the "no-deal" supporters may fall into line with the Government position.
The BBC has a tool that will allow you to see how any MP voted in the indicative votes. If you enter Boris Johnson in here, you'll see he backed only No-deal or the so-called Malthouse 2, which other answers on the site explain is unacceptable to the EU.
And here you have Johnson explaining why he will back May's deal in Meaningful Vote 3. And Rees-Mogg saying he will back the deal if the DUP will, which is a little like saying he'll support it if it will pass.
So in summary MPs can and have changed their positions on May's deal between votes 1 and 2, votes 2 and potential 3 and since yesterday's indicative votes and today. All of which may add up to enough support to push the deal over the line.
answered 14 hours ago
JontiaJontia
4,2162032
4,2162032
add a comment |
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
add a comment |
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
May is hoping that MPs will feel they have no choice but to support her deal to avoid a no-deal crash out, which they think is even worse.
Now that the indicative votes have failed to produce a majority for anything, she seems to think that the time is right to put her scheme into action.
answered 12 hours ago
useruser
9,95732240
9,95732240
add a comment |
add a comment |
Pali is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Pali is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Pali is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Pali is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Politics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpolitics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f39925%2fwhat-is-the-point-of-a-new-vote-on-mays-deal-when-the-indicative-votes-suggest%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
6
She may think that she can win based on her offer to resign.
– Karlomanio
15 hours ago
3
* So we can assume that at least 268 will vote against May's deal if another vote were held. * Given fluctuating positions expressed by some, and some seemingly illogical voting positions adopted by others, assumptions of that sort would appear to be premature
– Chris H
12 hours ago