So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who hve never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
The same old nonsense. We were always independent. Ironically, we proved that by leaving. We just used to work together for mutual benefit. Now we don’t and we’re poorer for it.
Meanwhile we put all out faith in a Westminster/Whitehall system that is utterly broken. PM Sunak what a shining beacon of democracy that man is. Who voted for this technocratic budget? Noone, not a sausage.
There is nothing exciting about this mess. Just taxes and cuts.
So vote for someone else, which is more than you could ever do with the EU commission.
The British executive is appointed, you don’t get to vote for who becomes a minister. But like the EU, we vote for the people who appoint the ministers.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
Brexit is like pensions policy or the NHS. Plenty wrong with it, but fat chance getting anyone to agree to change it because they will assume you are trying to screw them. So politics ends up as 19p versus 21p and rows about wallpaper.
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who hve never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
The same old nonsense. We were always independent. Ironically, we proved that by leaving. We just used to work together for mutual benefit. Now we don’t and we’re poorer for it.
Meanwhile we put all out faith in a Westminster/Whitehall system that is utterly broken. PM Sunak what a shining beacon of democracy that man is. Who voted for this technocratic budget? Noone, not a sausage.
There is nothing exciting about this mess. Just taxes and cuts.
So vote for someone else, which is more than you could ever do with the EU commission.
You can vote for a government that will send a different EU commissioner. If your complaint is that 500 million voters don't all take your orders, that's life.
I don't have a complaint, since we've left. But I wouldn't want those people to take my orders. I have no wish to have influence over the future of France and Italy. I am happy to let those countries do as they wish.
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who hve never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
The same old nonsense. We were always independent. Ironically, we proved that by leaving. We just used to work together for mutual benefit. Now we don’t and we’re poorer for it.
Meanwhile we put all out faith in a Westminster/Whitehall system that is utterly broken. PM Sunak what a shining beacon of democracy that man is. Who voted for this technocratic budget? Noone, not a sausage.
There is nothing exciting about this mess. Just taxes and cuts.
So vote for someone else, which is more than you could ever do with the EU commission.
The British executive is appointed, you don’t get to vote for who becomes a minister. But like the EU, we vote for the people who appoint the ministers.
I think we both know enough about both systems to understand where the other stands on the relative democratic credentials of both, and agree to differ.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
It's your opinion versus those of people who organise and work in real-world businesses, where office use and commutes are already back to pre-pandemic levels, at least midweek.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who hve never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
The same old nonsense. We were always independent. Ironically, we proved that by leaving. We just used to work together for mutual benefit. Now we don’t and we’re poorer for it.
Meanwhile we put all out faith in a Westminster/Whitehall system that is utterly broken. PM Sunak what a shining beacon of democracy that man is. Who voted for this technocratic budget? Noone, not a sausage.
There is nothing exciting about this mess. Just taxes and cuts.
So vote for someone else, which is more than you could ever do with the EU commission.
You can vote for a government that will send a different EU commissioner. If your complaint is that 500 million voters don't all take your orders, that's life.
I don't have a complaint, since we've left. But I wouldn't want those people to take my orders. I have no wish to have influence over the future of France and Italy. I am happy to let those countries do as they wish.
Those countries have decided that iPhones will have USB-C ports and Apple is not going to carry on making the usual Lightning port for the UK (even though we'd let them)..........
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
If someone, anyone, on here manages to either come up with (1) an original argument about Brexit or (2) one that manages to change the mind of anyone on this board I’ll eat my entire wardrobe. It’s been done. All of it.
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
It's your opinion versus those of people who organise and work in real-world businesses, where office use and commutes are already back to pre-pandemic levels, at least midweek.
BREXIT and FAILURE are now synonymous. As are TORIES and BREXIT. The other connotations are also pretty difficult for a political party to deal with. Old fashioned values ....empire...etc.
The Tory Party is not a comfortable home for any progressive voter. It's rebranded UKIP. The test for Starmer is being able to attract enough ex Tories that he can afford to dispense with the not insignificant reactionaries in his own Party
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
Tyndall is the purist’s purist.
Anything other than the revolution he has constructed in his head (which includes a quixotic mix of climate change denialism and completely open borders) leaves him puce with rage.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
Tyndall is the purist’s purist.
Anything other than the revolution he has constructed in his head (which includes a quixotic mix of climate change denialism and completely open borders) leaves him puce with rage.
There you go again, projecting your own anger. As those who know me on here outside of PB will confirm I don't get angry about these things. Why bother. The ostriches like yourself will never change so I might as well enjoy the argument and running rings around your dubious logic and ignorance.
So, the desire for reform of our political systems and making politics more accountable is 'purist' in your walnut sized brain then. Good to know.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
Its not because of overall testing as the UK has done more.
And given the low number of new cases in the UK during 2022 it might suggest that there many millions more people infected in the first few months before testing became widespread than was previously thought.
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
It's your opinion versus those of people who organise and work in real-world businesses, where office use and commutes are already back to pre-pandemic levels, at least midweek.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
To rubber stamp decisions made by the EU.
You are smarter than this. To take just one of dozens of examples, almost all tax and spend decisions are made by national governments, and these are by far the most divisive and controversial decisions taken by national governments in peacetime.
Time for Stamer to get on this horse before it gallops away. I can't see any downside and a considerable upside. Not least that it's now apparent to even the dimmest Leaver that they made a ruinous decision. It's now common knowledge and has even ffound it's way to Hartlepool. We've been led by donkeys but guess what? Those donkeys are the current government and they're taking us on a one way ticket to Palookaville
He has no rush. He can take a win and then take steps closer and closer and see the reaction, or lack thereof.
Look, I'd like us to still be in the EU as much as the next man, but spending 5 years renegotiating full entry would hole Labour under the water line on day 1. EFTA maybe, but again there are accommodations quicker to achieve than that. Get what we can in improved closer relations early doors, but don't allow it to dominate a primary domestic agenda.
Opportunities to tack closer will come in time.
Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.
And provided the UK hasn't done any big divergence that would be hard to unpick, the conversation will be easier to have in 2034 than 2024.
There was an assumption (see DD's comments about all the brilliant trade deals that would have been signed before we even left, or the promises to shred all Eurolaw in a year) that the UK would be decisively out of the EU's orbit by now. That hasn't really happened, partly because it is actually really hard to do, and partly because a lot of Conservative ministers since 2016 have been pin-headed ninnies.
After all, a government that got an 80 seat majority shouldn't be looking at the next election with this much fatalism.
Divergence is necessary to normalise the situation. It is inevitable that we will diverge, we will adapt, and we will move forward. We can only be parked in 'hopeless shitshow' for so long before the perpetrators are found out.
How often do countries that are adjacent to big trading blocs see their standards diverge?
Canada and the US are not in a monolithic bloc like the EU, and Canada essentially follows all US product standards.
I'm not necessarily talking about standards. Our policy is still dictated at multiple levels by adherence to the EU's plans. A few examples:
Lack of building reservoirs (and dredging), despite such infrastructure being needed to keep pace with an expanding population. This adherence to EU waterways directives is now totally unnecessary, but still enforced by the Environment Agency.
Energy policy - the accoutrements of a single energy market are still being added, interconnectors to Germany added at great expense to us, though we have a similar latitude and wind conditions, and similar energy shortages currently. Useless for Britain. We actually need better internal interconnectors to facilitate better use of wind power, not to mention energy storage - both better things to spend money on than connecting us to Germany. But we're still spending on it.
HS2 - a massive turkey. Completely obsolete and unnecessary now, even less necessarily when video conferencing will advance even further in the years ahead. A great candidate for any Government looking for savings. But it won't, because HS2 belongs to an overarching EU rail project.
These are just some that spring to mind. We must (and I believe will), kindly and gently let these things fall away, as we look after our own interests, whilst being good neighbours and compromising where it is mutually beneficial to do so.
Have you noticed "video conferencing" ending commutes to Canary Wharf? No.
I think we should embrace different forms of working, and accept that decentralised working, not necessarily at home, but perhaps in smaller hubs, can be efficient and widen prosperity. Not everyone needs to do the zombie commute into London every day, which is the only consumer purpose for HS2. Demand for it has cratered. Bin it.
It's your opinion versus those of people who organise and work in real-world businesses, where office use and commutes are already back to pre-pandemic levels, at least midweek.
Yes, but you can't tell commuters to use the spare Monday capacity to travel on Wednesday.
To be fair there is a danger that those claiming the railways are no longer needed are following the same methodology as was used for some of the Beechings cuts in the 60s. Sending out teams to look at passenger numbers at stations and on lines during the middle of the day when they are hardly used at all and ignoring the fact they are packed out morning and evening with commuters. Or leisure destinations that are massively popular at weekends and in holidays but not soi much during the normal working week.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
Tyndall is the purist’s purist.
Anything other than the revolution he has constructed in his head (which includes a quixotic mix of climate change denialism and completely open borders) leaves him puce with rage.
There you go again, projecting your own anger. As those who know me on here outside of PB will confirm I don't get angry about these things. Why bother. The ostriches like yourself will never change so I might as well enjoy the argument and running rings around your dubious logic and ignorance.
So, the desire for reform of our political systems and making politics more accountable is 'purist' in your walnut sized brain then. Good to know.
You may not be angry outside of PB, but you are certainly prone to rages on here. I think you’ve even admitted it yourself at times.
Per your last comment (to rubber stamp decisions from the EU) you are a bizarre mixture of insight, intolerance, nonsense and spittle.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
To rubber stamp decisions made by the EU.
You are smarter than this. To take just one of dozens of examples, almost all tax and spend decisions are made by national governments, and these are by far the most divisive and controversial decisions taken by national governments in peacetime.
He says some interesting things on democracy but then he comes out with absolute sub-Faragist claptrap like this.
One of the striking things about NAFTA is that one can say -- without too much distortion of history -- that it was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and ratified by Bill Clinton. (I would be in favor of extending it to Central American nations, beginning with Costa Rica.
(US companies often follow a Canadian standard, too, with directions in French added to many products. That helps Americans like me review the French we learned in high school, but has little effect here, otherwise.)
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
To rubber stamp decisions made by the EU.
You are smarter than this. To take just one of dozens of examples, almost all tax and spend decisions are made by national governments, and these are by far the most divisive and controversial decisions taken by national governments in peacetime.
Yep clearly national Parliaments still do a huge amount as you say. I was being a bit facetious.
But that is no excuse for the huge amounts of legislation that are produced by the EU over which national Parliaments have no say at all.
It is funny that those same people (not you necessarily) who are saying this is not the case are also screaming about plans to simply dump all of that EU legislation (a stupid and impossible idea in an artificial timeframe) and pointing out that it has inculcated every aspect of our political and administrative life.
I can't believe the Tories would even remotely entertain the possibility of yet another leader before the election. They'd become the laughing stock's laughing stock, both here and abroad, and that could also precipitate further economic troubles again.
Rishi it is, and Rishi will stay.
I don't see why anyone serious would want to change him, he's clearly competent, and much of the unpopularity of the government is due to things outside their control, like the pandemic and war in Ukraine. If circumstances were better Sunak would be doing just fine I think, as it is all he can really do is hope that in two years time the world is in a better place.
A caretaker pm.
Alec Douglas Second Home in California.
That’s very good.
One one hand it’s unfair to pick on Rishi’s unimaginable riches.
On the other hand, who in the UK has a second home in California? Is there no guaranteed sunshine closer to Britain?
So it turned out that Brexit was a bad move, and that placing our future in the hands of Farage and Johnson wasn’t completely shrewd. 🤷♂️ it’s like we are slowly waking up from an all night bender.
How have we placed the future in the hands of Farage?
Farage had an idea and we went “yes, let’s give that a try”.
So how have we placed the future in his hands?
Eh? We followed Farage and Johnson into this mess. They made Britain was it is today and limited what we can look forward to tomorrow.
Yes, OK. So how have we placed the future in his hands?
I am glad you’re clearly an optimist and we can back out of this shit show. I wish I had your faith. For me, this Faragean-Johnsonean dystopia has some time yet to run. Wasted years. We’re Nigel’s children.
I'd prefer to move forward than reverse. I find the fear of belonging to an independent country rather silly. I relish the idea that Sunak can be sacked at the behest of the British people and that the highest authority in the land will pass to a party that more British electors prefer. They will be able to shape Britain for the future, not as part of a bureaucratic plan set out by policy makers who have never been accountable democratically for their grand schemes. That is exciting. It should be relished by anyone who cares about politics and believes in democracy.
There’s half a reasonable point buried in here somewhere, but most will switch off when they read your batshit second sentence.
Thanks, I appreciate the part that is complimentary.
The strongest argument for Brexit is “sovereignty ”. The problem is that most Brexiters conceive sovereignty as an absolute quantity. They can’t see the trees for the wood.
No, the strongest argument is accountable politics. Sovereignty is only part of that.
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
The same reasons other European countries bother having a parliament?
Tyndall is the purist’s purist.
Anything other than the revolution he has constructed in his head (which includes a quixotic mix of climate change denialism and completely open borders) leaves him puce with rage.
There you go again, projecting your own anger. As those who know me on here outside of PB will confirm I don't get angry about these things. Why bother. The ostriches like yourself will never change so I might as well enjoy the argument and running rings around your dubious logic and ignorance.
So, the desire for reform of our political systems and making politics more accountable is 'purist' in your walnut sized brain then. Good to know.
You may not be angry outside of PB, but you are certainly prone to rages on here. I think you’ve even admitted it yourself at times.
Per your last comment (to rubber stamp decisions from the EU) you are a bizarre mixture of insight, intolerance, nonsense and spittle.
You genuinely mistake my abrasive argumentative style with anger. I have nothing to be angry about. Or at least nothing that is worth getting angry about. Plus I do enjoy winding people like you up because you tie yourself in logical knots.
One of the striking things about NAFTA is that one can say -- without too much distortion of history -- that it was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and ratified by Bill Clinton. (I would be in favor of extending it to Central American nations, beginning with Costa Rica.
(US companies often follow a Canadian standard, too, with directions in French added to many products. That helps Americans like me review the French we learned in high school, but has little effect here, otherwise.)
I thought Robert S. had always warned against the comprehensive NAFTA type trade deals because the courts are always loaded in favour of the US?
On topic, I think the solution for Starmer is to have some friendly centrist in some other EU government openly trying to get the EU to invite Britain back.
Probably what'll then happen is that one member state or other will be saying, "nah, don't want them" or "OK but they'll have to join the Euro and sing the song and everybody there has to learn the words, in German" and when anybody tries to bother Starmer with it he can say, "whatever you think about rejoining, it's not happening".
Alternatively it's just possible that everybody will line up around an invitation to rejoin. If that happens Starmer can say, "I'd have to put it to the voters" and hold a referendum.
That makes more sense than trying to do anything about it from the UK end, because: 1) The British won't want to feel like they're begging to be let back in 2) It would be kind of ridiculous and embarrassing for the UK to hold a referendum to rejoin, and overwhelmingly vote "yes", only for the EU to say, "lol no".
On topic, I think the solution for Starmer is to have some friendly centrist in some other EU government openly trying to get the EU to invite Britain back.
Probably what'll then happen is that one member state or other will be saying, "nah, don't want them" or "OK but they'll have to join the Euro and sing the song and everybody there has to learn the words, in German" and when anybody tries to bother Starmer with it he can say, "whatever you think about rejoining, it's not happening".
Alternatively it's just possible that everybody will line up around an invitation to rejoin. If that happens Starmer can say, "I'd have to put it to the voters" and hold a referendum.
That makes more sense than trying to do anything about it from the UK end, because: 1) The British won't want to feel like they're begging to be let back in 2) It would be kind of ridiculous and embarrassing for the UK to hold a referendum to rejoin, and overwhelmingly vote "yes", only for the EU to say, "lol no".
I still think we end up where we should always have been - in an EFTA/EEA type arrangement. It is politically safer for both sides because we all know Britain would continue to be a pain in the butt for the EU even if we rejoined.
One of the striking things about NAFTA is that one can say -- without too much distortion of history -- that it was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and ratified by Bill Clinton. (I would be in favor of extending it to Central American nations, beginning with Costa Rica.
(US companies often follow a Canadian standard, too, with directions in French added to many products. That helps Americans like me review the French we learned in high school, but has little effect here, otherwise.)
I thought Robert S. had always warned against the comprehensive NAFTA type trade deals because the courts are always loaded in favour of the US?
I don't like NAFTA for exactly that reason.
My point wasn't a very serious one, because the reality is that most product standards are ISO derived these days anyway.
On topic, I think the solution for Starmer is to have some friendly centrist in some other EU government openly trying to get the EU to invite Britain back.
Probably what'll then happen is that one member state or other will be saying, "nah, don't want them" or "OK but they'll have to join the Euro and sing the song and everybody there has to learn the words, in German" and when anybody tries to bother Starmer with it he can say, "whatever you think about rejoining, it's not happening".
Alternatively it's just possible that everybody will line up around an invitation to rejoin. If that happens Starmer can say, "I'd have to put it to the voters" and hold a referendum.
That makes more sense than trying to do anything about it from the UK end, because: 1) The British won't want to feel like they're begging to be let back in 2) It would be kind of ridiculous and embarrassing for the UK to hold a referendum to rejoin, and overwhelmingly vote "yes", only for the EU to say, "lol no".
I still think we end up where we should always have been - in an EFTA/EEA type arrangement. It is politically safer for both sides because we all know Britain would continue to be a pain in the butt for the EU even if we rejoined.
I can see the logic of that but I think it's politically risky for any Prime Minister to implement because all the voters except you will hate it from one end or the other.
On topic, I think the solution for Starmer is to have some friendly centrist in some other EU government openly trying to get the EU to invite Britain back.
Probably what'll then happen is that one member state or other will be saying, "nah, don't want them" or "OK but they'll have to join the Euro and sing the song and everybody there has to learn the words, in German" and when anybody tries to bother Starmer with it he can say, "whatever you think about rejoining, it's not happening".
Alternatively it's just possible that everybody will line up around an invitation to rejoin. If that happens Starmer can say, "I'd have to put it to the voters" and hold a referendum.
That makes more sense than trying to do anything about it from the UK end, because: 1) The British won't want to feel like they're begging to be let back in 2) It would be kind of ridiculous and embarrassing for the UK to hold a referendum to rejoin, and overwhelmingly vote "yes", only for the EU to say, "lol no".
I still think we end up where we should always have been - in an EFTA/EEA type arrangement. It is politically safer for both sides because we all know Britain would continue to be a pain in the butt for the EU even if we rejoined.
I can see the logic of that but I think it's politically risky for any Prime Minister to implement because all the voters except you will hate it from one end or the other.
I think it can be sold quite easily to the vast majority of moderates on both sides.
As an aside I do find it amusing that I, as an apparent 'purist' according to some on here have argued consistently for the very softest version of Brexit.
On topic, I think the solution for Starmer is to have some friendly centrist in some other EU government openly trying to get the EU to invite Britain back.
Probably what'll then happen is that one member state or other will be saying, "nah, don't want them" or "OK but they'll have to join the Euro and sing the song and everybody there has to learn the words, in German" and when anybody tries to bother Starmer with it he can say, "whatever you think about rejoining, it's not happening".
Alternatively it's just possible that everybody will line up around an invitation to rejoin. If that happens Starmer can say, "I'd have to put it to the voters" and hold a referendum.
That makes more sense than trying to do anything about it from the UK end, because: 1) The British won't want to feel like they're begging to be let back in 2) It would be kind of ridiculous and embarrassing for the UK to hold a referendum to rejoin, and overwhelmingly vote "yes", only for the EU to say, "lol no".
I still think we end up where we should always have been - in an EFTA/EEA type arrangement. It is politically safer for both sides because we all know Britain would continue to be a pain in the butt for the EU even if we rejoined.
I can see the logic of that but I think it's politically risky for any Prime Minister to implement because all the voters except you will hate it from one end or the other.
I think it can be sold quite easily to the vast majority of moderates on both sides.
As an aside I do find it amusing that I, as an apparent 'purist' according to some on here have argued consistently for the very softest version of Brexit.
Even part of the *remainer* vote doesn't want freedom of movement, the vast majority of the right will rage against it. If you try to do it without a referendum they'll cry betrayal and some of the people who voted Remain will agree, and if you have a referendum you'll have a hard time motivating your voters.
It's to EU membership as AV is to proportional representation.
Its not because of overall testing as the UK has done more.
And given the low number of new cases in the UK during 2022 it might suggest that there many millions more people infected in the first few months before testing became widespread than was previously thought.
Not sure how reliable the worldometer figures are.
On topic, my belief is that we'd never rejoin the EU, at best we'd join the single market, but more the polling goes in this direction, then rejoining will inevitably become part of the political discourse.
We just can't rejoin!
We had Gold Standard membership before we left, and then we left. Any proposed future membership will be as Germany and France's b**ch. Just not happening.
Brexit is dying on its arse. Imagine the swing against it by next GE.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
On topic, my belief is that we'd never rejoin the EU, at best we'd join the single market, but more the polling goes in this direction, then rejoining will inevitably become part of the political discourse.
We just can't rejoin!
We had Gold Standard membership before we left, and then we left. Any proposed future membership will be as Germany and France's b**ch. Just not happening.
We will not know what the accession deal will be until we start negotiations.
On topic, my belief is that we'd never rejoin the EU, at best we'd join the single market, but more the polling goes in this direction, then rejoining will inevitably become part of the political discourse.
We just can't rejoin!
We had Gold Standard membership before we left, and then we left. Any proposed future membership will be as Germany and France's b**ch. Just not happening.
We will not know what the accession deal will be until we start negotiations.
It's clear that Keir Starmer's manifesto will rule that out, so when exactly do you expect this to happen?
Brexit is dying on its arse. Imagine the swing against it by next GE.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
The shit sandwich of full employment and the highest pay rises for decades ?
Now perhaps the libertarian, globalist variety of Leaver is disappointed but then its up to them to make those aspects work. And that involves hard work not babbling about 'lucrative trade deals'.
But from Boston to Barnsley the working class Leavers got what they were promised, even the extra spending on the NHS.
On topic, my belief is that we'd never rejoin the EU, at best we'd join the single market, but more the polling goes in this direction, then rejoining will inevitably become part of the political discourse.
We just can't rejoin!
We had Gold Standard membership before we left, and then we left. Any proposed future membership will be as Germany and France's b**ch. Just not happening.
We will not know what the accession deal will be until we start negotiations.
It's clear that Keir Starmer's manifesto will rule that out, so when exactly do you expect this to happen?
Not within the next parliament, but quite possibly in the next but one. It might even be a Tory party serious about business by reverting to its decades long commitment to the EEC/EU that existed until 2016.
Such a U turn may well be the only route back from electoral oblivion for the Tories. U turns are possible on this as with so many of the policies announced since September. Tories are opportunists, and if that is the way back to government, that will be the road taken.
On topic, my belief is that we'd never rejoin the EU, at best we'd join the single market, but more the polling goes in this direction, then rejoining will inevitably become part of the political discourse.
We just can't rejoin!
We had Gold Standard membership before we left, and then we left. Any proposed future membership will be as Germany and France's b**ch. Just not happening.
I do tend to agree with the above, somehow the snakeoil salesmen (naming no names) managed to sell the idea the UK had a bad arrangement, my goodness how we were duped......
Brexit is dying on its arse. Imagine the swing against it by next GE.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
The shit sandwich of full employment and the highest pay rises for decades ?
Now perhaps the libertarian, globalist variety of Leaver is disappointed but then its up to them to make those aspects work. And that involves hard work not babbling about 'lucrative trade deals'.
But from Boston to Barnsley the working class Leavers got what they were promised, even the extra spending on the NHS.
Brexit is dying on its arse. Imagine the swing against it by next GE.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
The shit sandwich of full employment and the highest pay rises for decades ?
Now perhaps the libertarian, globalist variety of Leaver is disappointed but then its up to them to make those aspects work. And that involves hard work not babbling about 'lucrative trade deals'.
But from Boston to Barnsley the working class Leavers got what they were promised, even the extra spending on the NHS.
See the header, voters are famous for their lack of gratitude.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
I doubt he is actually colluding with Putin (can you imagine Vlad taking this English odd ball seriously) but he's what you call a "useful idiot" in the same way Tony Benn, Michael Foot and Arthur Scargill were 40 years ago...
AP and CNN have declared Republican the winner in CA27 - giving GOP their 218th seat & the majority in US House of Representatives. Democrat have been declared in 211 seats
Here are the six seats as yet undecided (source NYT)
Four where Republican is currently ahead in the count:
> CA22 - Valadao (R) leading by +6% [voted to impeach Trump after 1/6] (est. 67% counted)
> CA03 - Kiley (R) leading by +5% (est. 60% counted)
> CA13 - Duarte (R) leading by 0.81% (est 91% counted)
> CO03 - Boebert (R) leading by 0.35% (est +95% counted)
Four where Democat is currently in the lead:
> CA47 - Porter (D) leading by +3% (est 90% counted)
> AK At Large - Peltola (D) currently has 48% of first preferences (est 90% counted) in this Ranked Choice Voting election; rest of vote split on first preferences Palin (R) 26%, Begich (R) 24 and Bye (Lib) 2%
SSI - note that CA13 switched from Dem to Rep just in past hour's returns. However, my guess is that the four GOPers currently leading will in fact win, and also the two Dems.
So final split for US house - 222 Republican, 213 Democratic.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
A lot of people would think "rejoin" means on the previous arrangements... but of course that's not the case... There would need to be yet another extensive negotiation followed by another referendum which is why SKS won't go anywhere near this when he becomes Prime Minister.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit, as he most certainly will? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
A lot of people would think "rejoin" means on the previous arrangements... but of course that's not the case... There would need to be yet another extensive negotiation followed by another referendum which is why SKS won't go anywhere near this when he becomes Prime Minister.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
Nah, Tories are dead for a political generation.
No government since 1970 has been a single term, and most get 3 terms.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
A lot of people would think "rejoin" means on the previous arrangements... but of course that's not the case... There would need to be yet another extensive negotiation followed by another referendum which is why SKS won't go anywhere near this when he becomes Prime Minister.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
Nah, Tories are dead for a political generation.
No government since 1970 has been a single term, and most get 3 terms.
The 2024 general election will be 1974 not 1979, 1997 or 2010. Labour is too weak and there are too many contradictions within their "coalition" of voters to keep the show on the road beyond more than one term...
Brexit isn't the half of it. The real dilemma for Labour and SKS will be how to govern and keep their voters and the unions happy with no money to spray around and probably having to implement more cuts to public services....
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
A lot of people would think "rejoin" means on the previous arrangements... but of course that's not the case... There would need to be yet another extensive negotiation followed by another referendum which is why SKS won't go anywhere near this when he becomes Prime Minister.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
Nah, Tories are dead for a political generation.
No government since 1970 has been a single term, and most get 3 terms.
The 2024 general election will be 1974 not 1979, 1997 or 2010. Labour is too weak and there are too many contradictions within their "coalition" of voters to keep the show on the road beyond more than one term...
Brexit isn't the half of it. The real dilemma for Labour and SKS will be how to govern and keep their voters and the unions happy with no money to spray around and probably having to implement more cuts to public services....
Indeed, 1970 was the only single term parliament in a century or so. It really is exceptional for a government to not be re-elected after one term.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
A lot of people would think "rejoin" means on the previous arrangements... but of course that's not the case... There would need to be yet another extensive negotiation followed by another referendum which is why SKS won't go anywhere near this when he becomes Prime Minister.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
Nah, Tories are dead for a political generation.
No government since 1970 has been a single term, and most get 3 terms.
Usually that is because the party goes crazy in opposition and they have to learn not to do that before they moderate again. The Tories already learned that lesson with Truss.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
I don't think there's really any movement towards rejoining. I think people are feeling energy bills rising, and therefore a little poorer, and therefore they think (in a vague sort of way) that things were better.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
AP and CNN have declared Republican the winner in CA27 - giving GOP their 218th seat & the majority in US House of Representatives. Democrat have been declared in 211 seats
Here are the six seats as yet undecided (source NYT)
Four where Republican is currently ahead in the count:
> CA22 - Valadao (R) leading by +6% [voted to impeach Trump after 1/6] (est. 67% counted)
> CA03 - Kiley (R) leading by +5% (est. 60% counted)
> CA13 - Duarte (R) leading by 0.81% (est 91% counted)
> CO03 - Boebert (R) leading by 0.35% (est +95% counted)
Four where Democat is currently in the lead:
> CA47 - Porter (D) leading by +3% (est 90% counted)
> AK At Large - Peltola (D) currently has 48% of first preferences (est 90% counted) in this Ranked Choice Voting election; rest of vote split on first preferences Palin (R) 26%, Begich (R) 24 and Bye (Lib) 2%
SSI - note that CA13 switched from Dem to Rep just in past hour's returns. However, my guess is that the four GOPers currently leading will in fact win, and also the two Dems.
So final split for US house - 222 Republican, 213 Democratic.
Lol 60% counted after 9 days. Sunderland does it in 90 minutes
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
The Racing Post includes its free 80-page World Cup betting supplement today, which will include (their idea of) the best bet for followers of every team. Their main tip is Netherlands to win at 14/1.
Youtube has several World Cup preview videos, and the Racing Post will likely add one today.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
Ha ha. Crypto people don’t believe in laws or regulations, they live in their own little world of deregulated finance.
Thankfully, it looks like the FTX failure is going to lead to a cascade of other Crypto industry failures, with a number of other companies halting withdrawals due to funds locked up in FTX.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
I think the idea of a deal is fanciful. DeS might indeed decide not to run this time - though he’s unlikely ever to have a better chance of the nomination - but why would you agree to endorse a likely indicted felon ?
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
This isn't a problem for Starmer and won't be until mid-way through his first term. Why? Because rightly or wrongly the Conservatives are taking the blame for Brexit, almost 100%.
Starmer needs to do nothing at all about it right now. Once he has a majority and has addressed domestic issues, then he can return to this and potentially bring it back to the country. If and when he does he'll just need to be careful not to do a Cameron in reverse.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
All that queueing kudos (for those that gave a toss about that sort of thing) down the plughole. Though tbf the Windsors should approve of bumming up middle eastern autocrats.
Its not because of overall testing as the UK has done more.
And given the low number of new cases in the UK during 2022 it might suggest that there many millions more people infected in the first few months before testing became widespread than was previously thought.
Not sure how reliable the worldometer figures are.
Could be differences in how cases are counted, differences in testing policies, differences in what happens when someone self-tests positive with an antigen test (especially in recent months), a bigger Omicron wave in France. Could be more covid cases actually happened in France - but didn't I read an estimate a while back that 90% of people in the UK have had COVID by now? Probably similar in France I would have thought.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
All that queueing kudos (for those that gave a toss about that sort of thing) down the plughole. Though tbf the Windsors should approve of bumming up middle eastern autocrats.
Rather says it all that many Europeans want to boycott this World Cup but had no issues whatever with Putin’s World Cup mere weeks after he had used chemical weapons in England.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
That we have chosen a particularly costly and disruptive form of Brexit, out of a misguided desire to "respect the decision" of an electorate which now largely regards that decision as a mistake, would be hilarious.
If it did not have such malign consequences for the country.
Thread on Eustice’s complaints about the Australia deal:
@MPGeorgeEustice Trade with Australia will benefit a lot of non-food industries as well as UK whisky and gin producers and UK biscuit manufactures, our largest agricultural exports.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
There’s an awful lot of Brits turned up already in the sandpit. Definitely not the usual middle-class tourists that head for the beach resorts.
I’m looking forward to all the stories about the idiots who get into trouble, in countries somewhat more authoritarian than they might be used to, and who take a dim view of drunken antics.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
I think the idea of a deal is fanciful. DeS might indeed decide not to run this time - though he’s unlikely ever to have a better chance of the nomination - but why would you agree to endorse a likely indicted felon ?
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
DeSantis isn't a particularly exceptional candidate or anything; He's just in a rare position in the venn diagram of being fairly well-thought-of by the Trumpists but also being a normal, capable politician.
The first of those two probably won't be a requirement come 2028, so he'd be unwise to miss his moment IMHO.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
DeSantis isn't a particularly exceptional candidate or anything; He's just in a rare position in the venn diagram of being fairly well-thought-of by the Trumpists but also being a normal, capable politician.
The first of those two probably won't be a requirement come 2028, so he'd be unwise to miss his moment IMHO.
Presumably DeSantis is weighing the odds; he has made no announcement either way.
I've just watched again the Geoffrey Howe Resignation speech. Wow. It's almost entirely about Europe. So prescient. Prophetic. If you only have a few minutes watch from the 9 minute point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw1pcAzjRnc
it's well worth seeing it again.
If only we had heeded his words about a middle way with Europe. Spot on.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
DeSantis isn't a particularly exceptional candidate or anything; He's just in a rare position in the venn diagram of being fairly well-thought-of by the Trumpists but also being a normal, capable politician.
The first of those two probably won't be a requirement come 2028, so he'd be unwise to miss his moment IMHO.
Presumably DeSantis is weighing the odds; he has made no announcement either way.
He’s just been re-elected for four more years as governor of Florida. It would be a bit off to declare his running for another office, before he’s even been sworn-in after the election.
He’ll wait at least another year before he announces, as probably will the vast majority of the other candidates. Trump is simply trying to get ahead of the field, to make himself appear inevitable to the Republican base.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
Most electoral politics isn't about practical policies, it's about feels and labels. If that weren't so, local councillors wouldn't largely win and lose on the basis of how national parties are doing.
That's a shame, but it is largely how it is.
How does that apply to Brexit? Its majority depends on the votes of a specific generation- roughly those born in the 1950s and 60s. Who grew up outside the EEC and always felt it as a bit un-British. Not every Brexit backer is from that cohort, but the Brexit majority depended on them.
For voters born in the 1970s and after, the reverse is true. Growing up in the EEC, close attachment to the rest of Europe is the natural state and anything else is a deviation. It would take an awful lot to overcome that, and there's no real evidence of that happening.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
Same over here in Berlin. Another issue is that, like in the UK Food, price inflation is huge which is passed on in the pub and restaurant prices. The idea of going out in the winter paying overpriced prices for dinner and drinks in a rammed pub doesn't seem as attractive as watching the match on a T-shirt on the terrace as the sun sets.
Although, there is always an increase in WC/Euro interest once the competition is underway especially from those who don't take an interest in club football. Lets see how big that effect is this time round.
Neither membership of the EU nor leaving it is the cause of 'all our problems'. That kind of superficial, overly simplistic take may be typical of a disappointing class of political journalist but it's not true.
If we did end up with another referendum it would be interesting to see if both campaigns would be as atrocious as last time.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
All that queueing kudos (for those that gave a toss about that sort of thing) down the plughole. Though tbf the Windsors should approve of bumming up middle eastern autocrats.
Rather says it all that many Europeans want to boycott this World Cup but had no issues whatever with Putin’s World Cup mere weeks after he had used chemical weapons in England.
What do you think it says?
Plenty of good reasons to boycott the 2018 World Cup in Russia, but Britain only decided not to send officials, or the royal family, after the Skripal poisoning on British soil, rather than for any other of Putin's crimes (obviously because *that* happened in Britain...). So far as I know, no country apart from Britain made any meaningful World Cup response to the Skripal poisoning. Even then Britain didn't do anything really meaningful like not allowing the England team to play.
The difference this time is that fans, people in general, feel that it is absurd that the World Cup is being held in the desert, in winter, in a country with little footballing tradition. And that the ONLY reason is because of corruption.
note also the "lack of interest" reported above by another_richard
also false to say that no "Europeans" had any issues with the world cup being held in Russia last time.
Trump’s announcement was exactly what it looked like: a desperate, low-energy attempt to head off 2024 GOP primary challengers; possibly ward off ongoing investigations into his seizure of classified documents, January 6th, and attempts to overturn 2020 vote results in Georgia; and consolidate his wavering support. He is too weak not to run; his dwindling political assets are still worth too much to abandon.
I think Trump will eventually do a deal with De Santis where he'll withdraw and give him an endorsement in place of a Presidential pardon for all "crimes and misdemeanors".
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
Neither Trump nor DeSantis would agree that deal.
Ah, but after the Democrats' resurgence in the mid-terms, might DeSantis think this is a good nomination to lose? DeSantis likely has one lifetime shot at the presidency. 2024 no longer looks like the slam dunk it did just a fortnight ago. It would not surprise me if DeSantis announces his dedication to the state of Florida which has just re-elected him Governor, with an eye to the White House next time round when he would be up against a new, untried Democrat challenger, most likely the nationally unpopular Kamala Harris.
DeSantis isn't a particularly exceptional candidate or anything; He's just in a rare position in the venn diagram of being fairly well-thought-of by the Trumpists but also being a normal, capable politician.
The first of those two probably won't be a requirement come 2028, so he'd be unwise to miss his moment IMHO.
Presumably DeSantis is weighing the odds; he has made no announcement either way.
He’s just been re-elected for four more years as governor of Florida. It would be a bit off to declare his running for another office, before he’s even been sworn-in after the election.
I'm sure no GOP hematophage like RDS would ever consider doing something was "a bit off".
Is anyone else noticing a widespread lack of interest in the football world cup ?
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
Lots of sports bars boycotting it around here. No public viewings, unlike previous world cups. Supermarkets noticeably empty of flags and other fan tat (might be because they are so full of Christmas tat already), and not running world cup promotions. Football fans boycotting it. I haven't seen a single flag of any description so far. Seems very different to the last 2 world cups. Sponsors don't seem to be really pushing their connection. But Hummel got some good publicity by making their logo invisible on the Danish team kit.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
Same over here in Berlin. Another issue is that, like in the UK Food, price inflation is huge which is passed on in the pub and restaurant prices. The idea of going out in the winter paying overpriced prices for dinner and drinks in a rammed pub doesn't seem as attractive as watching the match on a T-shirt on the terrace as the sun sets.
Although, there is always an increase in WC/Euro interest once the competition is underway especially from those who don't take an interest in club football. Lets see how big that effect is this time round.
That's a good point: inflation, the weather, and the approach of Advent, are all helping keep interest low.
There is hardly a sector that isn’t being adversely affected by the poor deal that Boris Johnson concluded in January 2021. Last week Lord Wolfson of Aspley Guise, the chief executive of Next and himself a Brexiteer, pleaded for a relaxation in immigration rules to address worker shortages that were causing severe headaches for the retailer and the wider economy. “This is not the Brexit I wanted,” he said.
Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, similarly has pleaded for the return of young European workers upon whom the hospitality industry used to rely. Farmers have demanded an easing of restrictions on agricultural workers to avoid crops being left unpicked and animals being culled. Other sectors that used to rely on European Union workers now facing shortages include construction and social care.
None of this should surprise. In 2017, Adam Posen, another former MPC member, warned that Brexit would be stagflationary; that, by weakening the supply side of the economy through increased costs and new barriers to trade, it would boost inflation while constraining growth. Even some Brexiteer economists were honest enough to admit that Brexit would not be pain-free. Patrick Minford memorably said that over time Brexit would likely lead to the elimination of British manufacturing, but that this would be no bad thing as it would allow Britain to specialise in services.
Of course "wrong to leave" doesn't necessarily mean "lets rejoin"
Yeah, but polling for Rejoin isn't far behind...
As soon as the debate becomes about immigration that will change. The public despise the fact that it's forced on them and whenever the political conversation goes that way, the more immigration side loses. That will be even more the case as one in five of the population becomes foreign born.
It could go either way but if Brexit fails to deliver the reduction in immigration that the voters expected when they voted for it, it's not obvious that this will make them want to keep Brexit.
Real life is complex. Cause and effect are usual hidden and multifaceted.
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
One of the principal characteristics of Brexit, IMO, is that it is largely orthogonal to many of the problems it was supposed to address.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
And this is why pushing to rejoin would be such a bad idea. We'd spend at least another decade wrangling over the decision and doing nothing to address more immediate problems.
Comments
This is why Brexit is only one step along the way. We need reform of much of our political system (including in my opinion Scottish Independence and Irish reunification although I fully accept others don't agree on that). Reduce the power of the parties and enhance the power of MPs, more localisation, Lords reform and a whole host of other things.
But there was absolutely no point even starting to address the other issues until, or alongside, dealing with the democratic deficit that resulted from EU membership. What is the point of revising how our Parliament is elected and operates if it is then unable to do anything about laws made by a higher authority?
https://www.thebulwark.com/trump-returns-too-weak-not-to-run-again/
https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/usage/passenger-rail-usage/
The Tory Party is not a comfortable home for any progressive voter. It's rebranded UKIP. The test for Starmer is being able to attract enough ex Tories that he can afford to dispense with the not insignificant reactionaries in his own Party
Anything other than the revolution he has constructed in his head (which includes a quixotic mix of climate change denialism and completely open borders) leaves him puce with rage.
The Arizona election really does seem to have been unsatisfactory.
But having previously denied fair election results Kari Lake isn't going to be trusted about what happened last week.
So, the desire for reform of our political systems and making politics more accountable is 'purist' in your walnut sized brain then. Good to know.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Its not because of overall testing as the UK has done more.
And given the low number of new cases in the UK during 2022 it might suggest that there many millions more people infected in the first few months before testing became widespread than was previously thought.
Per your last comment (to rubber stamp decisions from the EU) you are a bizarre mixture of insight, intolerance, nonsense and spittle.
NAFTA? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Free_Trade_Agreement
One of the striking things about NAFTA is that one can say -- without too much distortion of history -- that it was proposed by Ronald Reagan, negotiated by George H. W. Bush, and ratified by Bill Clinton. (I would be in favor of extending it to Central American nations, beginning with Costa Rica.
(US companies often follow a Canadian standard, too, with directions in French added to many products. That helps Americans like me review the French we learned in high school, but has little effect here, otherwise.)
But that is no excuse for the huge amounts of legislation that are produced by the EU over which national Parliaments have no say at all.
It is funny that those same people (not you necessarily) who are saying this is not the case are also screaming about plans to simply dump all of that EU legislation (a stupid and impossible idea in an artificial timeframe) and pointing out that it has inculcated every aspect of our political and administrative life.
Probably what'll then happen is that one member state or other will be saying, "nah, don't want them" or "OK but they'll have to join the Euro and sing the song and everybody there has to learn the words, in German" and when anybody tries to bother Starmer with it he can say, "whatever you think about rejoining, it's not happening".
Alternatively it's just possible that everybody will line up around an invitation to rejoin. If that happens Starmer can say, "I'd have to put it to the voters" and hold a referendum.
That makes more sense than trying to do anything about it from the UK end, because:
1) The British won't want to feel like they're begging to be let back in
2) It would be kind of ridiculous and embarrassing for the UK to hold a referendum to rejoin, and overwhelmingly vote "yes", only for the EU to say, "lol no".
My point wasn't a very serious one, because the reality is that most product standards are ISO derived these days anyway.
As an aside I do find it amusing that I, as an apparent 'purist' according to some on here have argued consistently for the very softest version of Brexit.
It's to EU membership as AV is to proportional representation.
We had Gold Standard membership before we left, and then we left. Any proposed future membership will be as Germany and France's b**ch. Just not happening.
I don't expect a major party in England to campaign on Rejoin at GE 2024, but I can see a strong backlash against the party that gave us the shit sandwich in the first place.
Revenge will be a dish served cold when umpteen Brexity Tories get their P45.
Now perhaps the libertarian, globalist variety of Leaver is disappointed but then its up to them to make those aspects work. And that involves hard work not babbling about 'lucrative trade deals'.
But from Boston to Barnsley the working class Leavers got what they were promised, even the extra spending on the NHS.
Such a U turn may well be the only route back from electoral oblivion for the Tories. U turns are possible on this as with so many of the policies announced since September. Tories are opportunists, and if that is the way back to government, that will be the road taken.
I don't know if its because of its location or because its the wrong time of year to be holding it but nobody I know seems bothered.
Perhaps things will change when the matches begin.
Still at least its exposed Gary Neville as a money grabbing hypocrite.
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1592979825043468288
Can we really trust Zelenskyy?
(Glad Putin's got his money's worth.)
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/vegan-canapes-fat-donations-sam-bankman-fried-won-washington-lost-ever-rcna57551
Yes, it will be a complete stitch up and it'll stink to high heaven but at least everyone will be able to move on...
I doubt he is actually colluding with Putin (can you imagine Vlad taking this English odd ball seriously) but he's what you call a "useful idiot" in the same way Tony Benn, Michael Foot and Arthur Scargill were 40 years ago...
Here are the six seats as yet undecided (source NYT)
Four where Republican is currently ahead in the count:
> CA22 - Valadao (R) leading by +6% [voted to impeach Trump after 1/6] (est. 67% counted)
> CA03 - Kiley (R) leading by +5% (est. 60% counted)
> CA13 - Duarte (R) leading by 0.81% (est 91% counted)
> CO03 - Boebert (R) leading by 0.35% (est +95% counted)
Four where Democat is currently in the lead:
> CA47 - Porter (D) leading by +3% (est 90% counted)
> AK At Large - Peltola (D) currently has 48% of first preferences (est 90% counted) in this Ranked Choice Voting election; rest of vote split on first preferences Palin (R) 26%, Begich (R) 24 and Bye (Lib) 2%
SSI - note that CA13 switched from Dem to Rep just in past hour's returns. However, my guess is that the four GOPers currently leading will in fact win, and also the two Dems.
So final split for US house - 222 Republican, 213 Democratic.
But the question is what will Labour (and indeed Tory and Lib-Dem) rejoiners do when PM Starmer refuses to reopen Brexit, as he most certainly will? I don't think Labour are in the same position they were in 1997 when Blair made it clear he wouldn't reverse Thatchers economic reforms from the 1980s...
There will be an absolute meltdown between SKS and his party in 2025/2026 when he refuses to reopen Brexit (just one of several contradictions that means Labour and SKS will be a one term government from 2024 to 2029 followed by a swift return of the Tories IMO...)
No government since 1970 has been a single term, and most get 3 terms.
Brexit isn't the half of it. The real dilemma for Labour and SKS will be how to govern and keep their voters and the unions happy with no money to spray around and probably having to implement more cuts to public services....
But humans like to see simple stories, and draw easy lines of causation.
Youtube has several World Cup preview videos, and the Racing Post will likely add one today.
David Beckham has managed to completely trash his reputation.
Thankfully, it looks like the FTX failure is going to lead to a cascade of other Crypto industry failures, with a number of other companies halting withdrawals due to funds locked up in FTX.
DeS might indeed decide not to run this time - though he’s unlikely ever to have a better chance of the nomination - but why would you agree to endorse a likely indicted felon ?
Opinion | This Is What’s Going to Happen If Candidate Trump Gets Indicted
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/11/16/donald-trump-2024-campaign-legal-criminal-indictment-00067509
I think this is when, not if.
Yet managing the process has been such a massive distraction to government (and the electorate), for the best part of a decade, that it has exacerbated every one of those problems.
This isn't a problem for Starmer and won't be until mid-way through his first term. Why? Because rightly or wrongly the Conservatives are taking the blame for Brexit, almost 100%.
Starmer needs to do nothing at all about it right now. Once he has a majority and has addressed domestic issues, then he can return to this and potentially bring it back to the country. If and when he does he'll just need to be careful not to do a Cameron in reverse.
Ain't this so true
If it did not have such malign consequences for the country.
@MPGeorgeEustice
Trade with Australia will benefit a lot of non-food industries as well as UK whisky and gin producers and UK biscuit manufactures, our largest agricultural exports.
https://twitter.com/CeeMacBee/status/1592663248360288256
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrpA2uEWEgI&ab_channel=RobertSmithson
I’m looking forward to all the stories about the idiots who get into trouble, in countries somewhat more authoritarian than they might be used to, and who take a dim view of drunken antics.
The first of those two probably won't be a requirement come 2028, so he'd be unwise to miss his moment IMHO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw1pcAzjRnc
it's well worth seeing it again.
If only we had heeded his words about a middle way with Europe. Spot on.
What a tragedy.
He’ll wait at least another year before he announces, as probably will the vast majority of the other candidates. Trump is simply trying to get ahead of the field, to make himself appear inevitable to the Republican base.
That's a shame, but it is largely how it is.
How does that apply to Brexit? Its majority depends on the votes of a specific generation- roughly those born in the 1950s and 60s. Who grew up outside the EEC and always felt it as a bit un-British. Not every Brexit backer is from that cohort, but the Brexit majority depended on them.
For voters born in the 1970s and after, the reverse is true. Growing up in the EEC, close attachment to the rest of Europe is the natural state and anything else is a deviation. It would take an awful lot to overcome that, and there's no real evidence of that happening.
Although, there is always an increase in WC/Euro interest once the competition is underway especially from those who don't take an interest in club football. Lets see how big that effect is this time round.
As time goes on the story is emerging that all of our problems are caused by Brexit
Politicians will adopt that narrative for electoral gain
Neither membership of the EU nor leaving it is the cause of 'all our problems'. That kind of superficial, overly simplistic take may be typical of a disappointing class of political journalist but it's not true.
If we did end up with another referendum it would be interesting to see if both campaigns would be as atrocious as last time.
But most of our government for the last decade has been About the Brexit.
And so here we are.
Plenty of good reasons to boycott the 2018 World Cup in Russia, but Britain only decided not to send officials, or the royal family, after the Skripal poisoning on British soil, rather than for any other of Putin's crimes (obviously because *that* happened in Britain...). So far as I know, no country apart from Britain made any meaningful World Cup response to the Skripal poisoning. Even then Britain didn't do anything really meaningful like not allowing the England team to play.
The difference this time is that fans, people in general, feel that it is absurd that the World Cup is being held in the desert, in winter, in a country with little footballing tradition. And that the ONLY reason is because of corruption.
note also the "lack of interest" reported above by another_richard
also false to say that no "Europeans" had any issues with the world cup being held in Russia last time.
Tom Kerridge, the restaurateur, similarly has pleaded for the return of young European workers upon whom the hospitality industry used to rely. Farmers have demanded an easing of restrictions on agricultural workers to avoid crops being left unpicked and animals being culled. Other sectors that used to rely on European Union workers now facing shortages include construction and social care.
None of this should surprise. In 2017, Adam Posen, another former MPC member, warned that Brexit would be stagflationary; that, by weakening the supply side of the economy through increased costs and new barriers to trade, it would boost inflation while constraining growth. Even some Brexiteer economists were honest enough to admit that Brexit would not be pain-free. Patrick Minford memorably said that over time Brexit would likely lead to the elimination of British manufacturing, but that this would be no bad thing as it would allow Britain to specialise in services.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/128066ae-65ea-11ed-9c3b-2d9184d0076f?shareToken=210a33c157be9339478b1ad1d942c9f2