Maybe, and all those states, eg Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin being the most obvious examples, are on the outer edge of swing state, but not key states
Socrates - True, but it is still technically a swing state and Obama won Michigan by 10% nationally in 2012, thus all candidates bar Christie would seem to be doing worse nationally against Hillary than Romney did against Obama (even accounting for Romney being a son of Michigan)
These polls seem to be exposing Rubio. Always totally overrated
Rubio is a talented politician. It's just his party is dragging him down and binding him to unpopular positions.
Rubio tried to ride the anti-immigration tiger, and he's tainted himself
No, he's tried to ride the pro-amnesty tiger, and he's tainted himself.
@Tim "He could start by pointing out why Tory Govts believe in a single market and always have,and take on the immigration obsessed xenophobes.."
It's interesting Tim how you respond immediately, emotionally, and viscerally to any view critical of mass immigration, even though it's clear that it's something you know about through google rather than life-experience. I would expect you to be pleased to see your political opponents making what you view as a mistake So I think your reaction comes from either - The sight of one of your sacred cows being slaughtered OR - A deep fear that Labour is very much on the wrong side of Popular opinion on immigration, perhaps damagingly so for their electoral prospects.
Politically I'm enjoying the damage to the Tory party. But the xenophobia in some parts of this country (and among some on here) at the moment is sickening. If Cameron hasn't got the balls to stand up for Thatcherite priinciples of free movement then he should let someone with some bottle have a go.
Mrs T tightened up immigration rules significantly. In some years of the 79-97 Conservative govt there was net emmigration.
Mass migration from the EU was a Labour phenomenon.
@Tim "He could start by pointing out why Tory Govts believe in a single market and always have,and take on the immigration obsessed xenophobes.."
It's interesting Tim how you respond immediately, emotionally, and viscerally to any view critical of mass immigration, even though it's clear that it's something you know about through google rather than life-experience. I would expect you to be pleased to see your political opponents making what you view as a mistake So I think your reaction comes from either - The sight of one of your sacred cows being slaughtered OR - A deep fear that Labour is very much on the wrong side of Popular opinion on immigration, perhaps damagingly so for their electoral prospects.
Politically I'm enjoying the damage to the Tory party. But the xenophobia in some parts of this country (and among some on here) at the moment is sickening. If Cameron hasn't got the balls to stand up for Thatcherite priinciples of free movement then he should let someone with some bottle have a go.
Could you quote an example of the "sickening" xenophobia on here?
Read Richard Tyndall tackling you a couple of weeks ago, or Josias Jessop tackling MikeK. It's not a left right thing
My typing skills seem pretty slow. "Ed Balls" took me around a second. On the other hand "is a blithering idiot" (which followed) almost seemed to type itself!
UKIP is tricky for polling organisations. By putting them in the mix they undoubtedly boost their rating beyond the 'true' value, but if they don't then they're hardly being unbiased. Even a 12% rating is pretty phenomenal. I don't particularly agree with UKIP although I am somewhat Eurosceptical (if that's a word), nonetheless I think it is a healthy and good thing to see that substantial steps can be made by political movements outside of the old parties, and as such I think they and their supporters are to be congratulated.
It looks like Redditch might have been missed a few weeks ago as a seat where UKIP almost won the most votes in the local elections.
Votes cast in the constituency:
Lab 6,465 UKIP 6,290 Con 5,963 Green 979 LD 818 Others 213
The GE turnout in Redditch in 2010 was 44,000 voters , with UKIP voters being the most keen to turn out in May , they would be a poor 3rd even if they kept all their May voters .
It's President Elect Hilary Clinton in November 2016.
But does she want it ?
She had similar polling last time but one didn't she? If it wasn't for the history of the thing I suspect she'd rule herself out, and I think eventually she will anyway. That will be a shame in many ways as she is clearly someone worthy of such an accolade.
It's President Elect Hilary Clinton in November 2016.
But does she want it ?
She had similar polling last time but one didn't she? If it wasn't for the history of the thing I suspect she'd rule herself out, and I think eventually she will anyway. That will be a shame in many ways as she is clearly someone worthy of such an accolade.
It's President Elect Hilary Clinton in November 2016.
But does she want it ?
I have a very good contact in the US. Not in the inner circle, but in the inner circle but one - will most likely get a plum Embassy (not the top one, but the one he wants most). They are already planning/fundraising - for both the primary and the main campaign.
Cameron's offer to renegotiate with the EU is looking to be a massive ongoing political problem for him. I am a Cameron-sympathiser; I like his style, I like his calmness and I like that he isn't too right wing. But on Europe he has huge headaches.
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
@Tim "He could start by pointing out why Tory Govts believe in a single market and always have,and take on the immigration obsessed xenophobes.."
It's interesting Tim how you respond immediately, emotionally, and viscerally to any view critical of mass immigration, even though it's clear that it's something you know about through google rather than life-experience. I would expect you to be pleased to see your political opponents making what you view as a mistake So I think your reaction comes from either - The sight of one of your sacred cows being slaughtered OR - A deep fear that Labour is very much on the wrong side of Popular opinion on immigration, perhaps damagingly so for their electoral prospects.
Politically I'm enjoying the damage to the Tory party. But the xenophobia in some parts of this country (and among some on here) at the moment is sickening. If Cameron hasn't got the balls to stand up for Thatcherite priinciples of free movement then he should let someone with some bottle have a go.
Mrs T tightened up immigration rules significantly. In some years of the 79-97 Conservative govt there was net emmigration.
Mass migration from the EU was a Labour phenomenon.
Well obviousy high crime,frequent recessions and high taxes led to emigration, I was talking about the principles the Tories have always signed up to and Cameron supports.
He does support them you know. And the right of British people to live and work in Europe. Never hear the Kipers and their supporters talking much about them
I'm unsure if she will run. She's been First Lady, a Senator and Secretary of State - She been there and got the T-shirt. But will the call of history trump all.
If I was betting all of Mrs Jack W's shoe collection I'd edge into the running camp. But then life wouldn't be worth living until I was proved correct as she who must be obeyed doesn't do Sandy Shaw too well !!
It's President Elect Hilary Clinton in November 2016.
But does she want it ?
The dynastic urge seems irreducible . I wanted Hilary to win in 2008 so as to have had a Bush , Clinton , Clinton , Bush , Bush , Clinton sequence in the great republic. Obama interrupted my dreams but a Hilary Clinton vs Jeb Bush showdown in 2015/16 would reassure me.
I remember she was pretty short in the betting markets. I'd backed her and it was all looking great until a certain Mr Obama appeared.
I've laid her this time around at 3.5 or so. Despite the position I'd actually like to see her as the next President. I rather regret she didn't get the job in 2008. Obama is a good guy, but he's not been able to deliver great things. I think maybe Hilary could have done so, and maybe even now can.
@MonikerDiCanio - We might still have a Clinton. Clinton, Obama, Obama run from 2016 and perhaps by 2032 the GOP might find a human race friendly candidate !!
Cameron's offer to renegotiate with the EU is looking to be a massive ongoing political problem for him. I am a Cameron-sympathiser; I like his style, I like his calmness and I like that he isn't too right wing. But on Europe he has huge headaches.
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
What a load of crap. You could say EXACTLY the same about general elections - what does it REALLY mean to vote Tory, what does it REALLY mean to vote Labour?? You could also say the same about Scottish referendums: who knows what Yes actually means, what does a No truly entail?
Blah de blah. Fact is we haven't had a vote on Europe simply because the politicians are scared we will vote No, but that position was always unjust - and is now untenable.
Give Us A Vote. It's called democracy. End.
My heart tends to agree that we should just have a vote. But I'm trying to see it from a party leaders' point of view. And from that angle my head disagrees.
If you were PM and you had a load of things you wanted to achieve, would you offer an IN/OUT referendum? Imagine what would happen. Given how visceral and emotional the issue is it'd open a massive can of worms.
I bet all the advice PM's get from Whitehall mandarins, establishment officials, foreign office people etc etc is stay well away from it.
@MonikerDiCanio - We might still have a Clinton. Clinton, Obama, Obama run from 2016 and perhaps by 2032 the GOP might find a human race friendly candidate !!
Sadly the government asked us to sell it in the 1970s and repatriate the funds to demonstrate our confidence in the UK economy. Given this was just after the IMF loan it was a pretty big ask!
Your piece is an interesting read. I think you slightly miss that the EU is a bit worried about what might happen to them if the UK leaves. You're right it's unknown territory and the perils aren't to be ignored, but the dramatic tension isn't just on our side.
Although your idea of some vastly wise political machines on all sides crunching numbers to see how it may all turn out is attractive, I can't for one moment see that anything like that is going on. Economics just isn't that well understood, and certainly not by politicians. It has to be a decision based on principal. Change will undoubtedly cost all concerned in the short term.
My big thing is that having a common currency means you are a single state. That change is the important one and it has to happen, or the Euro will break up. It's a blindingly obvious train crash waiting to happen in tens of years time.
@MonikerDiCanio - We might still have a Clinton. Clinton, Obama, Obama run from 2016 and perhaps by 2032 the GOP might find a human race friendly candidate !!
Cameron's offer to renegotiate with the EU is looking to be a massive ongoing political problem for him. I am a Cameron-sympathiser; I like his style, I like his calmness and I like that he isn't too right wing. But on Europe he has huge headaches.
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
What a load of crap. You could say EXACTLY the same about general elections - what does it REALLY mean to vote Tory, what does it REALLY mean to vote Labour?? You could also say the same about Scottish referendums: who knows what Yes actually means, what does a No truly entail?
Blah de blah. Fact is we haven't had a vote on Europe simply because the politicians are scared we will vote No, but that position was always unjust - and is now untenable.
Give Us A Vote. It's called democracy. End.
Quite. In fact, it's far more clear what would happen if we left the EU, because it's the status of a whole bunch of countries: Switzerland, Korea, Japan, Canada, Australia etc. What's less clear is what will happen in the EU, because it's a unique experiment in integration between nations that has never happened before.
The frustrating thing for me about the ICM poll is that its the Tories themselves who are destroying their chances of a win in 2015 by their insane divisiveness over amongst other things the EU. DC has drawn uo a policy seeking tio reform the EU as a whole and thus make it a more acceptable organisatiion to belong to - too many pundits seem to see this simply in terms of what power he can get back from Brussels , whereas its not about special treatment for the UK but a recacting for the whole of the EU. This policy has receieved plaudits from disparate MP's as wide apart as Ken Clarke and Carswell but still its not enough for some and they refuse to simply shut up.The result is as the poll shows the Country hate it and will not vote for a divided Party.There is good evidencve that the economy may well be on the turn. Some real cause for optimism is there and all the time Ed M and Labour look incredibly shaky. If only the MP's would swing behind the PM then it truly could be all still to play for but instead their wretched plots swirl around and cause further holes in the tory boat.
Cameron's offer to renegotiate with the EU is looking to be a massive ongoing political problem for him. I am a Cameron-sympathiser; I like his style, I like his calmness and I like that he isn't too right wing. But on Europe he has huge headaches.
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
It's like being on a train going somewhere you definitely don't want to go. Would you rather end up there or get off even if that leaves you temporarily inconvenienced but able to go somewhere you do want to go ?
Sadly the government asked us to sell it in the 1970s and repatriate the funds to demonstrate our confidence in the UK economy. Given this was just after the IMF loan it was a pretty big ask!
I've never really understood the whole Tuscany obsession - until today. I've been here several times before, and I always love the sun, and love the food, and love Giorgione's Tempest in the Uffizi - but I've never felt the LUUUURRVE of Tuscany as a state of mind.
Tonight, as the swallows dip between the cypresses, I can maybe sense it. A trembling perfection, inclining towards sadness. Most intriguing.
It's like the Summer Country...with good weather ;-)
Cameron's offer to renegotiate with the EU is looking to be a massive ongoing political problem for him. I am a Cameron-sympathiser; I like his style, I like his calmness and I like that he isn't too right wing. But on Europe he has huge headaches.
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
What a load of crap. You could say EXACTLY the same about general elections - what does it REALLY mean to vote Tory, what does it REALLY mean to vote Labour?? You could also say the same about Scottish referendums: who knows what Yes actually means, what does a No truly entail?
Blah de blah. Fact is we haven't had a vote on Europe simply because the politicians are scared we will vote No, but that position was always unjust - and is now untenable.
Give Us A Vote. It's called democracy. End.
Quite. In fact, it's far more clear what would happen if we left the EU, because it's the status of a whole bunch of countries: Switzerland, Korea, Japan, Canada, Australia etc. What's less clear is what will happen in the EU, because it's a unique experiment in integration between nations that has never happened before.
I think that now that the EU is at its lowest ebb that it represents a strange oppurtunity for the UK. If we had a genius politician he or she could bend the whole EU apparatus to our benefit for a generation.
Just looked through the 300+ comments on CIF in response to the Guardian's analysis of the ICM poll. Could not find one comment in support of EdM, EdB and the rest of the shadow cabinet, but there is trough loads of criticism of Labour.
Cameron's offer to renegotiate with the EU is looking to be a massive ongoing political problem for him. I am a Cameron-sympathiser; I like his style, I like his calmness and I like that he isn't too right wing. But on Europe he has huge headaches.
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
What a load of crap. You could say EXACTLY the same about general elections - what does it REALLY mean to vote Tory, what does it REALLY mean to vote Labour?? You could also say the same about Scottish referendums: who knows what Yes actually means, what does a No truly entail?
Blah de blah. Fact is we haven't had a vote on Europe simply because the politicians are scared we will vote No, but that position was always unjust - and is now untenable.
Give Us A Vote. It's called democracy. End.
Quite. In fact, it's far more clear what would happen if we left the EU, because it's the status of a whole bunch of countries: Switzerland, Korea, Japan, Canada, Australia etc. What's less clear is what will happen in the EU, because it's a unique experiment in integration between nations that has never happened before.
But none of those countries have never been in the EU. If you could tell me emphatically that we can disentangle ourselves from 40 years of membership with minimal fuss and that we'll all sail off into a better future when OUT then I'd vote OUT tomorrow, Nothing would make me happier.
As Omnium says below (and I thank him for his wise point) the decision to drive an OUT vote should be made on principle. The fact that no leading political party is making a principled case for leaving concerns me that leaving may not be a good idea. Perhaps our leading politicians are a bunch of gutless Europhile dumbf*cks all gormlessly heading for the inevitable crash together, ready to take us down with it.
Or perhaps they are all hard-headed pragmatists, aware that the socio-economic and political situation across the EU is precarious right now and that a decision by a governing British party to leave the EU could destabilise things to a point beyond which we can control it.
I'm always willing to be told I am very, very wrong. And part of me wants Cameron to tell the EU to piss off and shat on the Brussels carpet as he leaves. But that's why people like me won't ever get very far in sensible politics. And it's why I'm among a minority of people who still naive/docile/servile to believe our political leaders will choose the best option for all of us.
Comments
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHYoQdnAaOw&feature=youtu.be
Mass migration from the EU was a Labour phenomenon.
It looks like Redditch might have been missed a few weeks ago as a seat where UKIP almost won the most votes in the local elections.
Votes cast in the constituency:
Lab 6,465
UKIP 6,290
Con 5,963
Green 979
LD 818
Others 213
But does she want it ?
UKIP is tricky for polling organisations. By putting them in the mix they undoubtedly boost their rating beyond the 'true' value, but if they don't then they're hardly being unbiased. Even a 12% rating is pretty phenomenal. I don't particularly agree with UKIP although I am somewhat Eurosceptical (if that's a word), nonetheless I think it is a healthy and good thing to see that substantial steps can be made by political movements outside of the old parties, and as such I think they and their supporters are to be congratulated.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/04/04/carville-signs-on-with-pro-hillary-super-pac/
When he came to power one of his biggest hopes would've been not to have to talk about Europe. The EU economic problems and the rise of UKIP have obviously forced his hand and I'd guess his offer to 'renegotiate' was and is nothing more than a holding tactic.
I doubt Cameron and his advisers have wargamed EU negotiations and what to do if they don't go our way at any great length. They offered the renegotiation route - probably, and arguably quite sensibly back then - in an attempt to kick the can as far down the road as they could. Until into the EU vacuum strolled UKIP. A UKIP led by a laddish, bubbly Farage with arguments echoed by clever Tory political orators like Dan Hannan, who are willing, from their sedentary positions of holding zero-power, to stick two fingers up to the EU and its creeping laws. I enjoy them doing that and during times of miserable circumstance it is nice and a bit patriotic to watch Brit politicians telling the Eurocrats to piss off. But given that it is imperative for any politician in power to need to control events as much as they possibly can, stating a desire to leave the EU is just not a sensible policy.
I dislike the EU. I don't like the unaccountability (nobody with an ounce of sense should) and the fact they can make more and more laws in our name without us having any say over it. It isn't democratic and it isn't good. And I am also uncomfortable with the fact that nobody has voted directly on an EU issue since the early 70s. That can't be good either.
But with regard to leaving the EU, that just fills me with a lot of concern. There must be lots of small pros to leaving and probably lots of small cons. But there must be zillions of unknowns. And those unknowns must concern anybody who cares about Britain's future.
I don't believe any Tory, Labour, Lib Dem or UKIP politician could ably spell out exactly what would happen if we left the EU. Therefore I perfectly understand why no leading politician from the main parties talks about leaving. It isn't because they are on the gravy train, or secret Europhiles or whatever else the Daily Mail and Telegraph commenters describe them as, it's because they genuinely don't know where it would lead.
I don't blame Farage for capitalising on that vacuum. Not at all. Well done to him. I like to see all EU-related largesse exposed. And the unwllingness and cowardice among Europhiles to make a case for British membership of the EU without scaremongering is something that completely pisses me off. But still, it doesn't make me sure I want to leave.
Cameron and Miliband are clever people and they are also pragmatists. Until they can wargame in their own minds (and I bet they can think a whole lot more clearly than I can) what EU exit would mean then they won't make a case for leaving. That may benefit Farage and UKIP, but until then, making a case for staying is the only logical thing to do.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22865297
I'm unsure if she will run. She's been First Lady, a Senator and Secretary of State - She been there and got the T-shirt. But will the call of history trump all.
If I was betting all of Mrs Jack W's shoe collection I'd edge into the running camp. But then life wouldn't be worth living until I was proved correct as she who must be obeyed doesn't do Sandy Shaw too well !!
I remember she was pretty short in the betting markets. I'd backed her and it was all looking great until a certain Mr Obama appeared.
I've laid her this time around at 3.5 or so. Despite the position I'd actually like to see her as the next President. I rather regret she didn't get the job in 2008. Obama is a good guy, but he's not been able to deliver great things. I think maybe Hilary could have done so, and maybe even now can.
The GOP will have to dig deep I think.
@MonikerDiCanio - We might still have a Clinton. Clinton, Obama, Obama run from 2016 and perhaps by 2032 the GOP might find a human race friendly candidate !!
If you were PM and you had a load of things you wanted to achieve, would you offer an IN/OUT referendum? Imagine what would happen. Given how visceral and emotional the issue is it'd open a massive can of worms.
I bet all the advice PM's get from Whitehall mandarins, establishment officials, foreign office people etc etc is stay well away from it.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BMfmg3kCQAAAO9c.jpg
http://www.royalresorts.co.in/italy/k2-borgo-di-colleoli
Sadly the government asked us to sell it in the 1970s and repatriate the funds to demonstrate our confidence in the UK economy. Given this was just after the IMF loan it was a pretty big ask!
Your piece is an interesting read. I think you slightly miss that the EU is a bit worried about what might happen to them if the UK leaves. You're right it's unknown territory and the perils aren't to be ignored, but the dramatic tension isn't just on our side.
Although your idea of some vastly wise political machines on all sides crunching numbers to see how it may all turn out is attractive, I can't for one moment see that anything like that is going on. Economics just isn't that well understood, and certainly not by politicians. It has to be a decision based on principal. Change will undoubtedly cost all concerned in the short term.
My big thing is that having a common currency means you are a single state. That change is the important one and it has to happen, or the Euro will break up. It's a blindingly obvious train crash waiting to happen in tens of years time.
As Omnium says below (and I thank him for his wise point) the decision to drive an OUT vote should be made on principle. The fact that no leading political party is making a principled case for leaving concerns me that leaving may not be a good idea. Perhaps our leading politicians are a bunch of gutless Europhile dumbf*cks all gormlessly heading for the inevitable crash together, ready to take us down with it.
Or perhaps they are all hard-headed pragmatists, aware that the socio-economic and political situation across the EU is precarious right now and that a decision by a governing British party to leave the EU could destabilise things to a point beyond which we can control it.
I'm always willing to be told I am very, very wrong. And part of me wants Cameron to tell the EU to piss off and shat on the Brussels carpet as he leaves. But that's why people like me won't ever get very far in sensible politics. And it's why I'm among a minority of people who still naive/docile/servile to believe our political leaders will choose the best option for all of us.