The Conservatives will need 326 seats (out of 650) to get back into government. As they have no friends to form a coalition with. So any seat won by another party reduces their chances of winning that many. Whereas if the Conservatives win less seats than that, provided all the opposition party's can cooperate, they can form a coalition. It looks like the SNP will win most of the Conservative seats in Scotland, amounting to them winning around 50 seats. Plus the Lib Dems will do well, they may win over 20 seats.

So from my perspective, it's looking like a coalition of the opposition forming our next government.

I must admit that after hearing the result of the 2017 election I did not believe a Brexit deal could be agreed by parliament. Finally my prediction has been proved right. I should have bet the house on it!

I didn't think that, although I didn't think about it. I was still under the impression that professional people would arrange a sensible deal and it would all go smoothly, just as I did the day after the referendum. Which is why I was quite relaxed about leaving the EU at that time.

I can't believe what has happened since then, the Conservative party has imploded trying to take rest rest of us down with them. I never would have predicted that.

The Conservatives will need 326 seats (out of 650) to get back into government. — Punshhh

Assuming Sinn Fein win back their current 7 seats, and they don't take them, and allowing for the Speakers & deputies who don't vote, the total is 640. I think much will rest on whether Boris's Tories can eat the Brexit Party vote down to 10% or less. I think they will. The Brexit Party is little more than a protest vote - in the EU elections they didn't have any policies at all! I don't think whatever policies they cobble together will stand up to full scrutiny in a general election. And with a deal in Boris's pocket he can ram home the message that a Tory victory is the quickest path to Brexit until even the dumbest Faragists agree. Boris just has to keep reminding them that any vote for the Brexit Party risks letting the remain parties in..

I hear the Brexit party is feeling forlorn as the Tory's won't talk with them about a pact. We haven't heard from them yet it will be interesting what line they take. I don't see them backing down as yet, there is a valid fear that in order for Johnson to get his deal through and hold his party together, by pleasing the moderates, if he gets a majority, he will water it down, until it is Brexit in name only.

Anyone have any predictions for the GE result? Will the leave voters be dispersed enough between the Cons and Brexit party? And will the remain vote be too divided between Labour, Lib Dems, SNP?

I don't have any certainty, commentators are saying it is likely to be the most unpredictable election in recent history. Because the smaller party's will win more seats due to the two main party's being divided on the Brexit issue. Also there is a big new issue, which did not figure much before, climate change. The other big problem for the Conservatives, is that their big election policy other then Brexit, is lots of spending on public services and infrastructure. But it is a hollow promise because it is their government which has starved these things of cash for the last 10 years, until they are at breaking point. For example, they are promising 20,000 more police officers, while they have cut officer numbers by 21,000 over the last 10 years. The voters will see through such hollow promises.

Added to this is the problem which has emerged for the Conservatives due to their hardline do or die policies. They don't have any friends, other party's who will go into coalition with them, or a confidence and supply arrangement, because they totally alienated the DUP by putting a border down the Irish Sea. What this means is for them to form a government they must have an outright majority, of between 321-326 (I can't find the exact figure) seats.

What this means for the opposition party's is that any seat won by any other party will reduce the majority which the conservatives can win. And the opposition party's will all cooperate if required in tactical voting, or coalition.

So taking all this into consideration my prediction is for a rainbow coalition of remain party's in coalition with the Labour Party.

Another miscalculation which the Conservatives have made, which was illustrated perfectly in an interview with Michael Heseltine on Sky News yesterday. Is that they are are overestimating the the perception in the mind of the voters of how reviled Corbyn is as a socialist.

Hesletine said, the Brexit vote was a protest vote against austerity (austerity is Corbyn's main attack line against the government and his socialist policies will immediately begin to reverse austerity). He then said that in his opinion Brexit is a calamitous mistake and he would vote for a party which will stop Brexit happening. That was all fine, but he then contradicted himself politically by attacking Corbyn as an extreme Marxist who is not fit to be prime minister and would never get into power. The problem being, if he is going to vote for any party which will stop Brexit, he will be voting to put Corbyn into government. He then found himself in an impossible position in which he couldn't say who he would vote for.

This is typical of the knots that the Conservatives have tied themselves into over these issues. Many dyed in the wool Conservatives believe this line that Corbyn is unelectable for these reasons, but they have lost touch with vast swathes of the country who are angry at the extent to which austerity is destroying our public services, fuelling the wealth divide and through universal credit, punishing the poor and causing a big increase in homelessness (this is a long list). Also there is a growing green vote worried about climate change. Such people will vote Green, or Labour.

As a UK citizen, I suggest a compromise solution to Brexit: be in AND out. Ie, stay in (promise reform of EU free movement of people to the UK, then hold a second referendum) but be the outsider.

The 2004 neo-liberal experiment of allowing virtually unrestricted access to the UK of people from poor east European countries (pushed by UK Labour premier Tony Blair) upset many locals. Boosted Euroscepticism led to the 2016 referendum, which was, in effect, the first public consultation on mass immigration. Result: split nation: loquatious liberals versus taciturn precariat.

Offered a binary choice, I voted to remain but was actually undecided. As a left-liberal who welcomes immigration, I nevertheless sympathised with the overlooked precariat - who were wrongly dismissed by the metrocentric liberal establishment as ignorant provincial racists.

But it's madness to abandon a good trading deal with our near neighbours in exchange for environment-destroying air and sea miles, and a sweetheart deal with corporate USA involving chlorinated chicken and a garage sale of the UK's National Health System.

So, let's stay in and, firstly, use the same EU rules as Germany and France have to restrict the "free movement" of people. (Mobility of cheap labour is no freedom.) Then vote for reforming the sh*t out of the corrupt, bloated, neo-lib EU gravy train. Then we can resume our previous blissful sense of indifference.

I agree on every point

So, let's stay in and, firstly, use the same EU rules as Germany and France have to restrict the "free movement" of people. (Mobility of cheap labour is no freedom.) — Chris Hughes

Isn't that what David Cameron tried before the referendum, and came back effectively empty-handed? The UK has no power to influence the EU to change, and its 4 freedoms are sacrosanct. What are the rules you mention that France and Germany use to restrict free movement?

Cameron sought concessions from the EU. He got some on EU immigration and benefits. (see, eg, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35622105)

This minor victory may have been drowned out by the noise of the referendum campaigning. The UK has never unilaterally used permitted restrictions as France and Germany have. For instance:

"In Germany, EU nationals have to apply for a residence card if they wish to work. This card can be withdrawn for various reasons, after which the holder is required to leave Germany or be forcibly expelled, and is automatically denied re-entry."

(Financial Times, UK, June 2018, "Tantalising glimpse of an EU compromise on freedom of movement'
https://www.ft.com/content/db49c91e-70ac-11e8-8863-a9bb262c5f53)

The UK has no power to influence the EU to change, and its 4 freedoms are sacrosanct. — Tim3003

Regarding the "sacrosant" four freedoms, if the free movement of people (FMP) (AKA the unrestricted mobility of cheap labour) is considered essential to the EU's single market, then that market's in serious need of reform.

As seen in Lode Desmet's brilliant two-part fly-on-the-wall TV documentary, "Brexit: Behind Closed Doors" (Storyville, BBC Four, May 2019), liberal MEP Guy Verhofstadt, Brexit coordinator for the European Parliament, federalist and, apparently, self-appointed High Priest of the Four Freedoms, pompously and melodramatically - if unconvingly - lectured a 2018 UK parliamentary committee on the supposed sanctity of FMP. Verhofstadt (who, unlike EU senior Brexit panjandrums Tusk, Juncker and Barnier, is at least elected) duly preached the 4F credo to the committee:

You cannot pick and choose one element out of this concept and say, 'We like everything, services, goods, capital, but not people. We don’t like people. They cannot come. Our goods can go out, our capital can go out, services can go out, but not people'. That is not the single market. Everybody on the continent understands that when you’re talking about the single market, it can not only be the freedom of movement of goods or services or capital, but that it also needs to be the freedom of movement of people. Because there are some countries in the single market who are specialised in goods. So they have an advantage on the single market with their goods. Some countries are specialised in services. I think we are here in the centre, in the capital of a country that is specialised, that has a huge advantage in services. Like other countries have an advange in that single market, because of their work force. And if you want to take out one of these elements, you destroy the concept itself of the single market.

(Transcript kindly provided to me by Lode Desmet)

So, how noble are the mighty four freedoms! We rich west Europeans can export our goods, services and capital. Poor east Europeans can export their cheap labour. Neo-liberalism at its grubby worst, I'd say.

Cameron sought concessions from the EU. He got some on EU immigration and benefits.

Yes, I thought Cameron did well when he sought concessions and I was surprised at the outcry from the Murdoch press etc, that the concessions were not good enough. It was the first time that I became aware of the extent of the anti EU poison that had been administered by such populist power brokers.

Yes, he got a kicking from most of the press. The ("on balance") pro-EU Guardian tried to be positive, saying the deal “achieves things that can make a difference.” Not exactly entbusiastic, though.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/19/the-guardian-view-on-the-eu-summit-last-tangle-in-brussels

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/feb/20/david-camerons-eu-deal-what-the-national-newspapers-said

Trump waded in to the election tonight on the Nigel Farage show on LBC.
He said about Johnson,
"He's the exact right guy for the times"
He said about Farage and Johnson,
"if you and him get together you'd be an unstoppable force"
He said about Corbyn,
"Corbyn would be bad for you he'd take you to bad places"

A gift for Corbyn and and an own goal for Farage and Johnson. Corbyn has already tweeted that it's sour grapes from Trump because he won't be able to buy out the NHS with a Corbyn government. Also he's put his foot in it suggesting that Farage and Johnson should team up. A toxic prospect for Johnson.

Seems to me that 'a vote for labour is a vote for more Brexit delays and confusion'. I don't see how that can be a winning proposition.

Labour would put it back to the people with binding alternatives. Which would take about 6 months. If Johnson wins and pushes through his deal, he would be snarled up in fractious negotiations for the next stage of talks with the EU, with periodic cliff edges and the continuation of the chaos and division.

The reason that the leaving arrangements with the EU are in such divisive chaos is entirely due to the infighting and rabid Brexit factions in the Conservative party. The party which has been in government for the whole period.

I think you're probably right, but as election platforms go, I think Johnson's claim to have an agreed deal in hand, even if it's not strictly true, is going to be very powerful. Don't know, of course,and may well be wrong - and in any case, we don't have that long a time to find out!

Yes, the Tories have a deal in hand - but Labour’s offering a second referendum. If voters go for ref2, the nation, now veering to Remain, might be reunited (if ref1 Leave voters' concerns can be allayed). And with Labour, stay or go, we avoid Trump's corporate chlorinated chicken.

Quite, the deal which would be negotiated by Labour would be very different to Johnson's deal. Myself as a remainer would be confident in Labour getting a good sensible deal closely aligned to the EU, provided Labour were in power for five years to steer us in the right direction. They might just manage to hold the Union( the UK) together, or if Scotland left, be able to prevent a hard border between England and Scotland.

But if Johnson gets in with a majority we are going to hell in a hand cart. He will ram through his deal with no care for the damage done, because his two main goals are more important than any collateral damage he does in achieving them, firstly to get 5 years in No 10, closely followed and linked hand in glove, with saving the Conservatives from electoral oblivion.

The third goal, making it a heady mix, is to prevent at all cost a socialist party getting into government. Readers outside the UK are probably not aware how profound this would be for the Conservatives and their supporter base. Also what a profound change it would be for the fortunes of our country following forty years of a stranglehold of Tory capitalism, which has brought our country to its knees. If Labour gets into power they will be going after the top 5% of earners and wealth hoarders.

As a UK citizen, I suggest a compromise solution to Brexit: be in AND out. — Chris Hughes

?

Why? Do you want to prolong the confusion and have everybody continue to be disappointed?

Be out: Be treated like the US (or Morocco) by the EU. No problem, actually

Be in: forget totally the last years that the UK has been in turmoil and just be like nothing happened, the referendum was just a bad dream.

Whereas if the Conservatives win less seats than that, provided all the opposition party's can cooperate, they can form a coalition. It looks like the SNP will win most of the Conservative seats in Scotland, amounting to them winning around 50 seats. Plus the Lib Dems will do well, they may win over 20 seats. — Punshhh

I'd like to ask the Britons here the following questions?

How are the Lib Dems seen in the UK? Is there a wedge in the conservative party?

I gather that there might be a of former conservatives that could be disappointed about the whole mess that the conservative party has made itself and how it has dealt with the issue, yet won't ever vote for such a catastrophe as the Labour party.

Why do you describe Labour as a catastrophe?

Farage(Brexit party)has opened his campaign, he has come out with a hard line of offering an election pact with the Conservatives. They must ditch their deal and go for no deal( or something equivalent) followed by a Canada style trade agreement by 14th of November, or he will field candidates in every seat and fight them to the death.

He's very critical of Johnson's deal, as a warmed up May deal, which is not really Brexit at all.

It sounds like the death nail of the Conservative party to me.

I gather that there might be a of former conservatives that could be disappointed about the whole mess that the conservative party has made itself and how it has dealt with the issue, yet won't ever vote for such a catastrophe as the Labour party.

Yes definitely, there are a lot of former and current Conservatives who are feeling sick watching the shambles. Who will switch to the Lib Dems. Although there is a sliding scale here against how hard they are on Brexit, the harder they are the more likely they are to go to Brexit party.

As I said earlier, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote for Corbyn getting into No 10, because the Conservatives don't have anyone to go into coalition with. Although the Brexit party may win a few seats( they have none now), who they could possibly form an alliance with.

There is a deep split in the Conservative party between hardline, right wing, hard Brexit and moderate, soft Brexit, or remain. Their Achilles heal is the Brexit party, that split will be yawning following the launch of the Brexit party campaign now.

Tory voters won't switch to Labour. Whatever the current state of Labour, why would they?

Because more voters identify with their vote to Leave or Remain than with a political party — and because no single party captures all of the Leave or Remain vote — they are likely to vote “tactically,” and look for the party that stands the best chance of winning in their area.

Politico

very few voters on either side of the argument have changed their minds about whether the UK should leave the EU. The country appears to be just as divided as it was three years ago.

On average, during the last month, polls that ask people how they would vote in another referendum suggest that 88% of those who backed Remain would do so again. Among those who voted Leave, 86% have not changed their minds.

These figures have changed very little during the last two years.

True, most polls suggest - and have done so for some time - that the balance of opinion might be tilted narrowly in favour of remaining a member of the EU. On average, this is by 53% to 47%.

However, this lead for Remain rests primarily on the views expressed by those who did not vote three years ago - and perhaps might not do so again.

In truth, nobody can be sure what would happen if there were to be another referendum.

BBC News

Labour has some problems, but it isn't a catastrophe. It could win. Then there'd be a second referendum next year (Labour's deal or remain). If it's Remain, we revoke Article 50 and... like in Dallas, it was all a bad dream...

Yes, the Tories have a deal in hand - but Labour’s offering a second referendum. If voters go for ref2, the nation, now veering to Remain, might be reunited (if ref1 Leave voters' concerns can be allayed). And with Labour, stay or go, we avoid Trump's corporate chlorinated chicken. — Chris Hughes

I cant see voters wanting another 6 month delay for ref2. Even if they swallowed that, the result will almost certainly be close and the arguing will continue. Also, the renegotiated Labour party Brexit deal is going to include Customs Union, Single Market membership, maybe even Freedom of Movement. All that is going to enrage Brexiteers who'll see it is Brexit in name only. So the referendum will be hugely problematical, divisive and if Remain wins the result won't be accepted by the leavers any more than the first one was by remainers. I can only see it making matters worse..

I'm a remainer too, but I think people want this exit deal put to bed. Yes part 2 will be just as complicated, but the prevailing view is 'let's get on with it.' Hadn't you noticed the 13% (and rising) Tory lead in the polls?

True.. but polls before the last two general elections and the referendum were wrong.