@Neil_FindlayMSP: Breaking - Business opportunities don't miss them brekkie with Nicola and Michelle Thomson + networking with Swinney http://t.co/nO4WsxwOyU
'THE SNP are well ahead of Labour in Glasgow in the latest poll for next year’s Holyrood Elections. The TNS poll, carried out in September after Kezia Dugdale and Jeremy Corbyn were elected as leaders, shows little or no “bounce” effect for Labour. For the constituency vote in the city’s eight seats the SNP were on 54% with Labour trailing on 24%. The LibDems were one point ahead of the Tories on 8% and 7% respectively. For the second “list” vote the SNP were still the highest party on 33% with Labour on 19%. The Green third on 4% and the Tories on 3% with the LibDems looking unlikely to regain a Glasgow MSP on just 2%. Almost one in five 18% were undecided and 14% said they would not vote.'
joyce miller @agapanthus49 20m20 minutes ago Eurocrats to pry into UK's vote to monitor in-out progress and plan a Propaganda blitz - well we know what happened in the last 'Blitz'.
Lets hope they still use Dorniers Do17 and Heinkels 111.
I used to find him quite engaging/willing to say the unsayable which was rare and long overdue. However over the last year, he's become a caricature of himself at times - and seems to be treating UKIP as his plaything/fighting for ego light with anyone who looks like a tall poppy.
I don't take the Party seriously at all with him in charge. There's too many examples of his personality picking a fight with his own side. I feel rather sorry for Carswell, Evans and O'Flynn.
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
I don't think that we have heard the last from UKIP, by a long chalk. There is a quiet revolution underway in many UKIP branches, and from these who knows what will flower?
102 MPs?
How we laughed.
And now you have Corbyn. I bet you ain't laughing now.
Like the laughing policeman at Corbyn, the gift that goes on giving.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
He comes across as a braying arsehole who is happy to say anything, no matter how controversial and offensive, so long as it keeps him in the headlines. His views are not representative of Britain and I am very concerned that a vote for Leave would be a vote to legitimise a Faragian Britain.
The vote for Remain or Leave isn't just about the EU, it's about what comes next. I really don't want Nigel Farage or anyone like him to be what comes next.
I don't think he's willing to say anything. I think he aims for a balance of something offensive enough to the media class to get in the headlines, but stops just short of offending the bulk of the public. However, sometimes he judges wrong and overshoots.
I think your last statement is an unreasonable worry, however. Just because we leave the EU doesn't mean that we get UKIP coming to power. They will always represent a minority of public opinion. The people negotiating what the UK looks like after a Brexit would be David Cameron or his successor. Osborne or Hammond probably.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure you can claim polling projection as 'FACT'. Now recent local and general election results......
I thought the general election result was a fair reference point?
I obviously didn't use the poll that had UKIP on 17% as that would extrapolate to the Tories being on 51%... Tut tut
No I think the point he is making is that polls are not a fact. They are as this election showed at best a guess.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
Rightly or wrongly Farage and UKIP have become inter alia the face of the opposition to things like Gay marriage, hatred of Islam/immigrants (we have a Kipper on here who openly admits he despises Islam) as well as being the face of Brexit.
So some people think voting for Brexit is a vote for all of that as well when they don't agree with the rest of Farage/UKIP's policies.
This is why the Leave campaign need people like Hannan, Lawson, Stuart and Hoey as centrepieces in it. I don't think it matters if Farage gets publicity, as long as he doesn't dominate.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
It's funny the way people here stereotype kippers as old fogeys... Ever been to a PB drink?!!
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
TBH, I feel Lawson is too old/grandee to lead this as a frontman. I tend to wince when I see him on the telly. I'd much prefer someone else, but not Farage/Hannan in the spotlight
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
I'm hoping Lord Lawson could get his group to present a plan for what a good deal looks like, and shows how it is plausible when compared to other trade deals out there.
It would also be good to get an assessment of what other trade deals we could get that we're currently missing out on.
I guess most of the still serving senior politicians are waiting to see what happens with the negotiations before taking sides, which seems fair. It will be really important to have two multi-party campaigns as well as those aimed at existing supporters, probably with different people fronting. Hannan's support of Europe but dislike for the EU as a corrupt institution deserves a wider audience, although to most he's probably best known for his takedown of Gordon Brown a few years back which won't endear him too much to Labour supporters.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure you can claim polling projection as 'FACT'. Now recent local and general election results......
I thought the general election result was a fair reference point?
I obviously didn't use the poll that had UKIP on 17% as that would extrapolate to the Tories being on 51%... Tut tut
No I think the point he is making is that polls are not a fact. They are as this election showed at best a guess.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
Yes and the point I am making is that, at the election, Ukip got one vote for every three the conservatives got... How can this be difficult to understand?
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
But does it matter that you and Farage have different views of what the post brexit UK look like? If we leave, farage will still not be an MP, be leader of a party with one seat and won't even be an MEP. It doesn't mean he will have any say over anything (much like now)
It doesn't matter to me in making my decision - for the reasons that you put. It does however mean that it is much harder for 'Leave' to state 'this is what post-leave Britain will look like so vote for it' as @CasinoRoyale appeared to be suggesting they should do.
If Leave becomes associated with projecting a post-leave Britain which is anti gay-marriage, anti-immigrant, 'little Englander' - then (in my opinion) that will be very negative as there is a limited number of people who would vote for that. (and I would be tempted to move back to Remain)
Much better for the main Leave campaign to focus on disadvantages of staying, and of projecting a positive vision of choice for the future. (ie what post leave looks like depends on the people - but it is at least their choice, not that of unelected eurocrats)
'Well said. Those in the middle third of the spectrum of views on EU membership are really not persuaded by the arguments made by either Farage or Clegg. Those advocating one way or the other need to make their case to the undecideds, not their own loyal fans. '
Clegg was telling us that if we didn't join the Euro we would lose 3 million jobs etc.the fact that the exact opposite is the reality means he has zero credibility and 'Stay' should keep him well away from the campaign.
Whilst i'm not a fan of Farage it won't stop me voting to leave, but certainly a more credible leader would help with the undecided.
If voters are bothered about the current high levels of immigration ,and the polls suggest they are,then 'Leave' is the only option.
Off topic, I hear Nicky Morgan is on maneoveres but is also doomed to fail. She is the most europhile leadership candidate yet to show an interest.
I don't know what it is about Tory female MPs in marginal seats: Morgan, Soubry, Ellison and Sandys. They're all EUphile ideologues and sell-outs.
I don't know why Nicky Morgan thinks she could be leadership material.
Female Pro EU Tory Education Secretary has her leadership credentials written off.
Where have I heard that before?
Probably at a a time when the rest of the country was far more enthusiastic about the EU project and Tory Europhiles were more than just the insignificant quisling rump they are today.
Did you miss this week's poll that shows the Tories more Pro-EU than the country? (I concede this was probably an outlier)
Quisling? QUISLING? I'm just glad you didn't say Tory Europhiles were like Vichy France. That would have been unacceptable.
TSE. As far as I am concerned the only difference between Pro EU Tories and Vichy France is that you are not led by a former war hero. Hence my use of Quisling's name instead.
And the poll was bollocks. Even you know that deep in your heart.
Even if you believe this sort of stuff, it does your side no good at all. Many of the people you need to persuade to win the referendum are people who were once pro-EU, or who are currently supporters of politicians that are pro-EU.
Its a bit like some of the Nats.
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
And here we have the mirror image of Richard Tyndall's "pro-EU people are all traitors". Instead it's "anti-EU people are all xenophobes".
I find that there are far too many ideologues on both sides. UKIP would never accept EU membership even if we got a fantastic renegotiation. Labour and the Lib Dems would never support leaving even if we became a pure satellite state of a united Eurozone. I would usually listen to the Conservative leadership, except for the fact they have been very dishonest on their claims in the past, and they can seem more driven by political concerns rather than the long term good of the country.
The people I will be mainly listening to are the backbench Conservative MPs that aren't longstanding BOOers.
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
Rightly or wrongly Farage and UKIP have become inter alia the face of the opposition to things like Gay marriage, hatred of Islam/immigrants (we have a Kipper on here who openly admits he despises Islam) as well as being the face of Brexit.
So some people think voting for Brexit is a vote for all of that as well when they don't agree with the rest of Farage/UKIP's policies.
This is why the Leave campaign need people like Hannan, Lawson, Stuart and Hoey as centrepieces in it. I don't think it matters if Farage gets publicity, as long as he doesn't dominate.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
But does it matter that you and Farage have different views of what the post brexit UK look like? If we leave, farage will still not be an MP, be leader of a party with one seat and won't even be an MEP. It doesn't mean he will have any say over anything (much like now)
It doesn't matter to me in making my decision - for the reasons that you put. It does however mean that it is much harder for 'Leave' to state 'this is what post-leave Britain will look like so vote for it' as @CasinoRoyale appeared to be suggesting they should do.
If Leave becomes associated with projecting a post-leave Britain which is anti gay-marriage, anti-immigrant, 'little Englander' - then (in my opinion) that will be very negative as there is a limited number of people who would vote for that. (and I would be tempted to move back to Remain)
Much better for the main Leave campaign to focus on disadvantages of staying, and of projecting a positive vision of choice for the future. (ie what post leave looks like depends on the people - but it is at least their choice, not that of unelected eurocrats)
But the fact is that our parliament voted for gay marriage, and UKIP have said there is no chance of them undoing that law... Mainly because they won't be in power to do it, but also because they wouldn't if they were
Leave can only win by getting the votes of moderates and so it follows that there won't be a majority of little England gay hating islamaphobes in charge
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
Rightly or wrongly Farage and UKIP have become inter alia the face of the opposition to things like Gay marriage, hatred of Islam/immigrants (we have a Kipper on here who openly admits he despises Islam) as well as being the face of Brexit.
So some people think voting for Brexit is a vote for all of that as well when they don't agree with the rest of Farage/UKIP's policies.
This is why the Leave campaign need people like Hannan, Lawson, Stuart and Hoey as centrepieces in it. I don't think it matters if Farage gets publicity, as long as he doesn't dominate.
Frank Field
About 70 and just had a stroke brought on by loony lefties getting in his face at a hustings .. Ticks all the right boxes, I'm sure there won't be any left wing nutters giving the leave campaign grief
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure you can claim polling projection as 'FACT'. Now recent local and general election results......
I thought the general election result was a fair reference point?
I obviously didn't use the poll that had UKIP on 17% as that would extrapolate to the Tories being on 51%... Tut tut
No I think the point he is making is that polls are not a fact. They are as this election showed at best a guess.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
Yes and the point I am making is that, at the election, Ukip got one vote for every three the conservatives got... How can this be difficult to understand?
I understood it I just don't particularly care. At the election the share of protest votes of which UKIP are a part of went down rather than up. At the election the share of protest seats of which UKIP are a part of went down rather than up. At the election my parties share of the vote went up. At the election my parties share of seats went up.
The underlying them of this week was not to be complacent and though there will always be protest votes, we're doing what we can to win a majority. We are not a "moral crusade or nothing" party, we are a pragmatic party and need to continue to be pragmatic and build a bigger tent in the centre to centre-right of British politics using sound money and social justice. It is both what I want to vote for and what I believe the country will vote for.
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
Rightly or wrongly Farage and UKIP have become inter alia the face of the opposition to things like Gay marriage, hatred of Islam/immigrants (we have a Kipper on here who openly admits he despises Islam) as well as being the face of Brexit.
So some people think voting for Brexit is a vote for all of that as well when they don't agree with the rest of Farage/UKIP's policies.
This is why the Leave campaign need people like Hannan, Lawson, Stuart and Hoey as centrepieces in it. I don't think it matters if Farage gets publicity, as long as he doesn't dominate.
Frank Field
About 70 and just had a stroke... Ticks all the right boxes
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
But does it matter that you and Farage have different views of what the post brexit UK look like? If we leave, farage will still not be an MP, be leader of a party with one seat and won't even be an MEP. It doesn't mean he will have any say over anything (much like now)
It doesn't matter to me in making my decision - for the reasons that you put. It does however mean that it is much harder for 'Leave' to state 'this is what post-leave Britain will look like so vote for it' as @CasinoRoyale appeared to be suggesting they should do.
If Leave becomes associated with projecting a post-leave Britain which is anti gay-marriage, anti-immigrant, 'little Englander' - then (in my opinion) that will be very negative as there is a limited number of people who would vote for that. (and I would be tempted to move back to Remain)
Much better for the main Leave campaign to focus on disadvantages of staying, and of projecting a positive vision of choice for the future. (ie what post leave looks like depends on the people - but it is at least their choice, not that of unelected eurocrats)
But the fact is that our parliament voted for gay marriage, and UKIP have said there is no chance of them undoing that law... Mainly because they won't be in power to do it, but also because they wouldn't if they were
Leave can only win by getting the votes of moderates and so it follows that there won't be a majority of little England gay hating islamaphobes in charge
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
It's funny the way people here stereotype kippers as old fogeys... Ever been to a PB drink?!!
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
The former Labour communications chief said Mr Corbyn was now in 'the big league' and that he will 'discover everything he’s done and everything he said is going to be brought up'
He should have been in the big league when he stood for the leadership. Bizarrely no-one really brought all this up until most of the electorate had voted. It's obvious why the right-wing media were sitting on their hands, but where were the attacks in the Guardian, Indy and Mirror, and the condemnation from Burnham, Cooper and Kendall?
So it seems the big league is only when you play with the Tories (and the SNP). About right, looking at the political landscape today.
The mindset of many, and particularly many on the left, is that if you suppress discussion of something then it's as good as not happening. They therefore denied Corbyn the oxygen of publicity in the hope that by doing so he'd go away. To have responded would have legitimised his position as a credible candidate, which ignored the fact that votes also legitimised that position.
Burnham et al were complacent and hubristic. And when they realised the trouble they were in they were unwilling to say what needed to be said about Corbyn, as DC did so brutally yesterday. Cowardice and complacency are not a good combination.
They deserved to lose. A pity all of them couldn't have lost.
Although it has to be said that it may well not have worked. The majority of the people who voted for Corbyn will have done so for precisely the reasons that Cameron castigated him. For them, his values and history were not to be condemned but to be celebrated.
I suspect that there was also an element of game-playing: had Burnham launched a broadside against Corbyn, even had it hit the mark, the effect may well have been to benefit the candidate who didn't engage in uncomradely action, namely Cooper. So neither Cooper nor Burnham did get into that game until it was far too late; indeed, Burnham never got into it at all.
I have no interest in persuading people like TSE. Long ago we tried reasoned argument with him but he was more interested in petty party politics than real discussion of policy. If he has not changed his view by now in spite of what he has seen and heard about the EU then he is never going to. People like him who put party before country deserve all the opprobrium that can be heaped upon them.
Thinking that my attacks on the Quislings will make any difference to the final vote is as vacuous as claiming one is going to vote for remain because they don't like Farage. In both cases it reveals the void at the heart of the Pro EU argument.
I don't think that's fair. Changing long-held views is a difficult and emotional process, it requires patience.
TSE has been very honest in mapping out what might swing his vote, and the terms on which he'd do it. We can't make anyone do anything, all we can do is seek to persuade them.
Insulting them really doesn't help matters.
I'm a swing voter on this. It's a novel experience which, I hope, has given me greater insight into how the often much-derided swing voters ("a few people in a few seats who can't make up their mind") in marginals feel.
You want to look at the case as rationally as possible, but the way in which you are spoken to does make a big difference: the ideologues on both sides are equally capable of impressing me or leaving me cold.
Well said. Those in the middle third of the spectrum of views on EU membership are really not persuaded by the arguments made by either Farage or Clegg. Those advocating one way or the other need to make their case to the undecideds, not their own loyal fans.
For me, M. Hollande is the best advocate for the Leave campaign today. The attitude that we should either join the USoE or f. off (to paraphrase only slightly) will lead to the latter option being taken.
Snap! But that did come from a country where an intended insult ('nation of shopkeepers') was received as a compliment!
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron hashtml
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure you can claim polling projection as 'FACT'. Now recent local and general election results......
I thought the general election result was a fair reference point?
I obviously didn't use the poll that had UKIP on 17% as that would extrapolate to the Tories being on 51%... Tut tut
No I think the point he is making is that polls are not a fact. They are as this election showed at best a guess.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
Yes and the point I am making is that, at the election, Ukip got one vote for every three the conservatives got... How can this be difficult to understand?
I understood it I just don't particularly care. At the election the share of protest votes of which UKIP are a part of went down rather than up. At the election the share of protest seats of which UKIP are a part of went down rather than up. At the election my parties share of the vote went up. At the election my parties share of seats went up.
The underlying them of this week was not to be complacent and though there will always be protest votes, we're doing what we can to win a majority. We are not a "moral crusade or nothing" party, we are a pragmatic party and need to continue to be pragmatic and build a bigger tent in the centre to centre-right of British politics using sound money and social justice. It is both what I want to vote for and what I believe the country will vote for.
Incredible, you really are
Arguing over a simple statement of fact drawn from a general election result
Ukip votes weren't really UKIP votes
Every Tory vote was a positive vote for the Tories
STAY will win the eu-ref, by about 10 points, but fairly soon after the EU will start doing *outrageous* things - common taxes, common army, common migration - fully expecting us to join in, on the understandable grounds that we have now voted for the EU twice (more than anyone else) and this is what the EU is meant to be.
No UK government will be able to submit to this level of integration, and we will end up quitting anyway (or moving to *associate* status). All of this will happen in short order, and possibly without a third referendum.
I'd be interested in hearing alternative prognoses, as the above looks well-nigh inevitable.
Agree with all of that. Would add that calls for surrendering the rebate etc will start about 5 minutes after the exit poll is announced.
Leave can only win by getting the votes of moderates and so it follows that there won't be a majority of little England gay hating islamaphobes in charge
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
Farage is toxic and a drag on the campaign. He has bought into his own parties delusions now and lost the plot as Brown did. This was crystal clear to me in the most recent time he was given a slot on TV to speak as he wanted (on This Week) and he spent the entire time he was on the air attacking fellow eurosceptics like Portillo. Even Alan Johnson and Andrew Neil were laughing at him for attacking Portillo so aggressively but having nothing to say to Johnson.
That toxicity will not win a referendum. If he is centre of the Out campaign, then the smart bet is to lay Out.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
It's funny the way people here stereotype kippers as old fogeys... Ever been to a PB drink?!!
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
But does it matter that you and Farage have different views of what the post brexit UK look like? If we leave, farage will still not be an MP, be leader of a party with one seat and won't even be an MEP. It doesn't mean he will have any say over anything (much like now)
It doesn't matter to me in making my decision - for the reasons that you put. It does however mean that it is much harder for 'Leave' to state 'this is what post-leave Britain will look like so vote for it' as @CasinoRoyale appeared to be suggesting they should do.
If Leave becomes associated with projecting a post-leave Britain which is anti gay-marriage, anti-immigrant, 'little Englander' - then (in my opinion) that will be very negative as there is a limited number of people who would vote for that. (and I would be tempted to move back to Remain)
Much better for the main Leave campaign to focus on disadvantages of staying, and of projecting a positive vision of choice for the future. (ie what post leave looks like depends on the people - but it is at least their choice, not that of unelected eurocrats)
But the fact is that our parliament voted for gay marriage, and UKIP have said there is no chance of them undoing that law... Mainly because they won't be in power to do it, but also because they wouldn't if they were
Leave can only win by getting the votes of moderates and so it follows that there won't be a majority of little England gay hating islamaphobes in charge
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
The BBC Trust should be scrapped and have its powers transferred to a new board and an independent regulator for the first time in its history, the corporation has conceded.
In a submission to the government the BBC will admit that the trust is no longer seen as a "credible and independent" regulator and suggest that its responsibilities should be transferred to an internal regulator.
It comes after the BBC Trust was heavily criticised for its handling of the Jimmy Savile scandal and a series of multi-million pound pay-offs at the corporation.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
It's funny the way people here stereotype kippers as old fogeys... Ever been to a PB drink?!!
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
The BBC Trust should be scrapped and have its powers transferred to a new board and an independent regulator for the first time in its history, the corporation has conceded.
In a submission to the government the BBC will admit that the trust is no longer seen as a "credible and independent" regulator and suggest that its responsibilities should be transferred to an internal regulator.
It comes after the BBC Trust was heavily criticised for its handling of the Jimmy Savile scandal and a series of multi-million pound pay-offs at the corporation.
We already have a media regulator. It's called Ofcom.
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
And farage has said himself a long long time ago
I totally agree.
It is not what he is saying now. He appeared very bitter and aggressive on This Week and made crystal clear that he wanted to be at the forefront of the Out campaign and that BOO Conservatives should let him take charge.
Months ago he wasn't like that I agree. He is now. I honestly feel he has lost the plot, it is tough for anyone being at the forefront of politics and he has been for his side for a very long time now. I don't think he expected to fail so badly in May (in his own seat especially let alone other candidates) and I don't think he has recovered from that defeat. He is becoming bitter and smallminded, just plain toxic. Sooner he is gone, the better chance Out has of winning.
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
It's funny the way people here stereotype kippers as old fogeys... Ever been to a PB drink?!!
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
Leave can only win by getting the votes of moderates and so it follows that there won't be a majority of little England gay hating islamaphobes in charge
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
Farage is toxic and a drag on the campaign. He has bought into his own parties delusions now and lost the plot as Brown did. This was crystal clear to me in the most recent time he was given a slot on TV to speak as he wanted (on This Week) and he spent the entire time he was on the air attacking fellow eurosceptics like Portillo. Even Alan Johnson and Andrew Neil were laughing at him for attacking Portillo so aggressively but having nothing to say to Johnson.
That toxicity will not win a referendum. If he is centre of the Out campaign, then the smart bet is to lay Out.
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
And farage has said himself a long long time ago
I totally agree.
It is not what he is saying now. He appeared very bitter and aggressive on This Week and made crystal clear that he wanted to be at the forefront of the Out campaign and that BOO Conservatives should let him take charge.
Months ago he wasn't like that I agree. He is now. I honestly feel he has lost the plot, it is tough for anyone being at the forefront of politics and he has been for his side for a very long time now. I don't think he expected to fail so badly in May (in his own seat especially let alone other candidates) and I don't think he has recovered from that defeat. He is becoming bitter and smallminded, just plain toxic. Sooner he is gone, the better chance Out has of winning.
He wasn't at his best and didn't look good on this week that is certainly true
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
Farage made it his purpose to try and destroy the Conservative Party, as his way up the greasy pole. He made it personal...so it's not too hard to reciprocate. And you might take a kinder view of his abilities than I do, but they wouldn't get him a rank above a junior Minister in this Govt. And my money would be on him to be first to resign from that Govt. amidst some scandal or other.
Farage is all about - only about - Farage. He is skin stretched tight over an enormous ego. That he chooses to parade himself to the public on one of the biggest issues facing the country is natural, but his presence debases the debate. There will indeed be good numbers of people who will find it difficult to vote LEAVE if they know that means a gurning, self-satisfied Farage plastered over their TV screens the next day.
STAY will win the eu-ref, by about 10 points, but fairly soon after the EU will start doing *outrageous* things - common taxes, common army, common migration - fully expecting us to join in, on the understandable grounds that we have now voted for the EU twice (more than anyone else) and this is what the EU is meant to be.
No UK government will be able to submit to this level of integration, and we will end up quitting anyway (or moving to *associate* status). All of this will happen in short order, and possibly without a third referendum.
I'd be interested in hearing alternative prognoses, as the above looks well-nigh inevitable.
Agree with all of that. Would add that calls for surrendering the rebate etc will start about 5 minutes after the exit poll is announced.
It is a big concern. When the French expect us to join Schengen and the Germans expect us to join the Euro down the line, it is a big warning sign they will not respect our independence indefinitely. And even if we have legal opt-outs on those things, it suggest they will be willing to force into other areas where we do not. This is why we need binding protections on things like QMV, so we can't get outvoted by the Eurozone every time.
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
On what planet is Luton born Nadia a 'foreigner'?
Some on this site have decreed anyone born in this country is still an immigrant if their parents were, that they should be treated as second generation immigrants and not really British. I don't think surbiton agrees but he's making his comment in that context.
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
On what planet is Luton born Nadia a 'foreigner'?
Some on this site have decreed anyone born in this country is still an immigrant if their parents were, that they should be treated as second generation immigrants and not really British. I don't think surbiton agrees but he's making his comment in that context.
Certainly not Plato - to whom the sneer comment was directed.
Anyway, if we're going to send the immigrants back we should do it alphabetically.
May I ask a serious question to those on here, and there seems to be plenty, why do you dislike Farage so much? I find it peculiar to read that some would vote IN because of him.
I'm not looking for a fight, I'm just curious to hear your thinking. I know him but not well enough to consider us friends, he's a very bight man in conversation.
Farage made it his purpose to try and destroy the Conservative Party, as his way up the greasy pole. He made it personal...so it's not too hard to reciprocate. And you might take a kinder view of his abilities than I do, but they wouldn't get him a rank above a junior Minister in this Govt. And my money would be on him to be first to resign from that Govt. amidst some scandal or other.
Farage is all about - only about - Farage. He is skin stretched tight over an enormous ego. That he chooses to parade himself to the public on one of the biggest issues facing the country is natural, but his presence debases the debate. There will indeed be good numbers of people who will find it difficult to vote LEAVE if they know that means a gurning, self-satisfied Farage plastered over their TV screens the next day.
We'll just have to hope the majority aren't as shallow, short-sighted and petulant as that won't we?
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
On what planet is Luton born Nadia a 'foreigner'?
Some on this site have decreed anyone born in this country is still an immigrant if their parents were, that they should be treated as second generation immigrants and not really British. I don't think surbiton agrees but he's making his comment in that context.
Which comes back to Leave making damn sure that Farage isn't front and centre of the Leave campaign, and it is much wider and more inclusive. (Which is what I think most of us have been saying on here in different ways this morning)
And farage has said himself a long long time ago
I totally agree.
It is not what he is saying now. He appeared very bitter and aggressive on This Week and made crystal clear that he wanted to be at the forefront of the Out campaign and that BOO Conservatives should let him take charge.
Months ago he wasn't like that I agree. He is now. I honestly feel he has lost the plot, it is tough for anyone being at the forefront of politics and he has been for his side for a very long time now. I don't think he expected to fail so badly in May (in his own seat especially let alone other candidates) and I don't think he has recovered from that defeat. He is becoming bitter and smallminded, just plain toxic. Sooner he is gone, the better chance Out has of winning.
He wasn't at his best and didn't look good on this week that is certainly true
In one way I feel sorry for him. I don't think he's recovered from May and its sad for him and I pity him.
Few things are worse in politics than pity though. He's served his party and his cause with distinction in the past and deserves a retirement from that and perhaps then he could play a major role in the referendum as a UKIP "big beast"/"elder statesmen".
STAY will win the eu-ref, by about 10 points, but fairly soon after the EU will start doing *outrageous* things - common taxes, common army, common migration - fully expecting us to join in, on the understandable grounds that we have now voted for the EU twice (more than anyone else) and this is what the EU is meant to be.
No UK government will be able to submit to this level of integration, and we will end up quitting anyway (or moving to *associate* status). All of this will happen in short order, and possibly without a third referendum.
I'd be interested in hearing alternative prognoses, as the above looks well-nigh inevitable.
Fairly soon after? These things are already happening:
Common Army: "Angela Merkel will expect David Cameron to drop his opposition to an EU army in exchange for supporting Britain’s renegotiation, the Telegraph has been told.
STAY will win the eu-ref, by about 10 points, but fairly soon after the EU will start doing *outrageous* things - common taxes, common army, common migration - fully expecting us to join in, on the understandable grounds that we have now voted for the EU twice (more than anyone else) and this is what the EU is meant to be.
No UK government will be able to submit to this level of integration, and we will end up quitting anyway (or moving to *associate* status). All of this will happen in short order, and possibly without a third referendum.
I'd be interested in hearing alternative prognoses, as the above looks well-nigh inevitable.
Yes, the alternative is that all this happens and the UK Government WILL submit to the required level of integration, as it always has. The public will be pulled along by fear of job losses, terrorism, bubonic plague - whatever it takes to do the job. Tories will say it's a great deal because Cameron has negotiated tough and secured the right of British soldiers to continue to wear red jackets when performing the changing of the guard. It will later be revealed that there was never a plan to stop them wearing red jackets, but thanks for the idea and it will go on the list for the next treaty. Whereupon Cameron will negotiate tough again and secure an opt out on brass buttons.
STAY will win the eu-ref, by about 10 points, but fairly soon after the EU will start doing *outrageous* things - common taxes, common army, common migration - fully expecting us to join in, on the understandable grounds that we have now voted for the EU twice (more than anyone else) and this is what the EU is meant to be.
No UK government will be able to submit to this level of integration, and we will end up quitting anyway (or moving to *associate* status). All of this will happen in short order, and possibly without a third referendum.
I'd be interested in hearing alternative prognoses, as the above looks well-nigh inevitable.
Even the other European leaders as daft as they seem are not that ignorant/self-defeating.
They'll understand we've voted to stay in as part of an EU Single Market but not an EU Ever Closer Union. Even though that phrase is pretty meaningless on its own, the fact that Cameron has brought it front and centre as a case of "no to Ever Closer Union" (even in his speech yesterday which got a polite round of applause not a standing ovation for that).
There is no way to reconcile the UK saying "we'll stay in but not going ever closer" to turn around and say "OK you want a European Superstate". Until today we've always been signed up to the phrase Ever Closer Union and this is an unambiguous change of direction.
I expect the "outrageous" things you've suggested will be done at a Eurozone level. This doesn't just remove us from being concerned but other nations like Denmark who would veto it too.
My biggest concern and biggest doubt is if there is no reform to QMV then what is to stop the Eurozone bloc deciding a position then forcing it through without us getting a say? At the moment that's not too big of a worry as the Eurozone is not homogenous and we can get our way by playing some Eurozone nations we agree with against those we disagree with. If they continue to unify then we could find ourselves being outvoted all the time and if that were to happen I would reconsider my position. But we're not there yet and I'm hoping this is part of Cameron's renegotiation (if it is I'd find it easier to vote stay).
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The final nail was Frau Merkel. It was just all too much to excuse, the implications for us grave and the damage to the rest of the EU impossible to reverse. Having moved across - I'd be very surprised if I could be convinced to return. I'm not even that bothered by what Leave looks like - I've no faith in Stay.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
On what planet is Luton born Nadia a 'foreigner'?
Some on this site have decreed anyone born in this country is still an immigrant if their parents were, that they should be treated as second generation immigrants and not really British. I don't think surbiton agrees but he's making his comment in that context.
There are some fourth-generationers who are still essentially immigrants. The issue is not so much where they were born but what cultural / ethnic values they live by and with which communities they primarily identify.
"We should all be cautious before reaching any firm conclusions. The data is still fragmented, patchy and scarce. But from what we do know, and what we can already see, only one judgement is possible: Labour has somehow found the best possible way to concentrate votes and strength where it cannot use them or does not need them, and give ground where it desperately needs to make it up. If it continues on the path it has set itself, the very early evidence suggests that Labour is going to be mauled in 2020, perhaps very badly. The party has conspired to locate precisely what might be called its bitter spot. This equates to the exact place where they make the least possible gain of MPs for votes: the opposite of that sweet spot the Conservatives managed to find in 2015, converting ballots into seats in a more efficient way than they have managed for decades. It is a bitterness Labour is probably going to have to get used to."
I have no interest in persuading people like TSE. Long ago we tried reasoned argument with him but he was more interested in petty party politics than real discussion of policy. If he has not changed his view by now in spite of what he has seen and heard about the EU then he is never going to. People like him who put party before country deserve all the opprobrium that can be heaped upon them.
Thinking that my attacks on the Quislings will make any difference to the final vote is as vacuous as claiming one is going to vote for remain because they don't like Farage. In both cases it reveals the void at the heart of the Pro EU argument.
I don't think that's fair. Changing long-held views is a difficult and emotional process, it requires patience.
TSE has been very honest in mapping out what might swing his vote, and the terms on which he'd do it. We can't make anyone do anything, all we can do is seek to persuade them.
Insulting them really doesn't help matters.
I'm a swing voter on this. It's a novel experience which, I hope, has given me greater insight into how the often much-derided swing voters ("a few people in a few seats who can't make up their mind") in marginals feel.
You want to look at the case as rationally as possible, but the way in which you are spoken to does make a big difference: the ideologues on both sides are equally capable of impressing me or leaving me cold.
I've been left cold by the ideologues on both sides. I've yet to be impressed on either side.
As an undecided, I don't want to be bombarded with economic statistics and graphs, most of which will be entirely spurious on both sides. If you have an absolutely killer fact, by all means share it with me, but check that it really is a killer fact that will change my decision rather than reconfirm your own.
I'm most interested in finding out which side is presenting a future that is most respectful of all the things I like best about Britain. At the moment, Remain is being disingenuous about the changes that are likely to come if we stay in the EU and Leave is ranting to me about immigrants. Remain need to identify some clear lines in the sand and Leave need to show that they aren't seeking to lead a reactionary coup of the nation.
Put another way, if I am forced to choose between Jean-Claude Juncker and Nigel Farage, it's a really really unattractive choice.
From being a firm REMAIN I'm now definitely undecided. I must say that, as far as Juncker and Farage go, if we LEAVE we get neither and if we REMAIN we get both. Maybe that's why I'm wavering.
Corbyn cannot attend the Privy Council until he has personally pledged total loyalty and allegiance to the Monarch of the day...or Madge...If he doesn't then he cant ..
A Conservative Councillor’s proposals for the Union Jack flag to be flown at schools across Calderdale and for the national anthem to be sung in assemblies has been rejected.
Labour councillors in Calderdale, supported by the Liberal Democrats, rejected the idea of flying the Union Flag on public buildings as “inappropriate”.
Coun Benton said these things, we were assured, were likely to make us more divisive and ‘promote nasty, nationalistic tendencies’
@carldinnen: New; Source close to Jeremy Corbyn tells ITV News he will attend the Privy Council in future. #Corbyn #PrivyCouncil
So, it's not a principled stand, it's just a hissy fit
Sounds as though he had something to do which, for whatever reason, he regarded as more important than a purely ceremonial event. Cameron didn’t turn up for a while after being elected LOTO, either. Should be easy enough to find out what it is.
A Conservative Councillor’s proposals for the Union Jack flag to be flown at schools across Calderdale and for the national anthem to be sung in assemblies has been rejected.
Labour councillors in Calderdale, supported by the Liberal Democrats, rejected the idea of flying the Union Flag on public buildings as “inappropriate”.
Coun Benton said these things, we were assured, were likely to make us more divisive and ‘promote nasty, nationalistic tendencies’
Is it only me who couldn't care less about Corbyn not seeing the Queen for his induction to the Privy Council?
The fact is that Corbyn doesn't want to bend the knee to the Queen as he's a committed republican and quite frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the Queen feels the same back. Not only that but an Order in Council as an alternative is not only possible but happens fairly often, just not normally for senior politicians.
Yes Corbyn could attend a ceremony and cross his fingers behind his back or something similar but to do it by Order in Council rather than a confrontation with the monarch seems like a reasonably civil face-saving compromise for everyone. There are bigger issues than this. Like any other issue.
Corbyn cannot attend the Privy Council until he has personally pledged total loyalty and allegiance to the Monarch of the day...or Madge...If he doesn't then he cant ..
The monarch is just the embodiment of the country, but since Corbyn wants to destroy the country and everything its stands for he has a problem. It makes you wonder how he could ever accept being PM. You would have to think he would refuse the Queens commission..
I had not heard about the common corporation tax one. That could be very damaging to the UK economy.
Really? It's been proposed for decades - but it requires unanimity not QMV and even if were Eurozone only the Irish would veto it let alone us. It is a complete non-starter of an idea and not a concern at all.
As someone who was intending to vote Stay and has moved to a firm Leave, I've found it a quite visceral experience. I wanted to be convinced that we could negotiate something better - then my faith just seeped away bit by bit with each new stupidity.
The only things preventing Leave from getting traction now are disbelief, denial, change inertia, the toxification of Leave by the likes of Farage and the failure to map out a safe, credible post-EU economic alternative and, crucially, the roadmap for getting there.
I'm sorry Casino Royale, but I do think this is verging on the vacuous.
What you say is that "leave" haven't said where they want to go or how to get there.
But that is basically anyone needs to do, of whatever political persuasion.
To say that Leave would be winning, if only they could do those two things, could equally be said of any political position.
I think we're agreeing with each other - the problem is very clear (Remain) but the case for change (Leave) hasn't been made.
If it were, I think Leave could win by up to 65/35.
Part of the issue is that different people will have very different views of what they think a post-leave 'UK' should look like.
I am leaning towards Leave, but my view of what the UK should look like in a post-leave world and Farage's view are almost total opposites of each other.
You could have put it more concisely. You don't want foreigners here. Hell, they are even winning "bake off"'s.
On what planet is Luton born Nadia a 'foreigner'?
Some on this site have decreed anyone born in this country is still an immigrant if their parents were, that they should be treated as second generation immigrants and not really British. I don't think surbiton agrees but he's making his comment in that context.
There are some fourth-generationers who are still essentially immigrants. The issue is not so much where they were born but what cultural / ethnic values they live by and with which communities they primarily identify.
Would you describe someone who produced:
near-perfect iced buns and millefeuille......[and] a patriotic, Union Jack-themed wedding cake
A Conservative Councillor’s proposals for the Union Jack flag to be flown at schools across Calderdale and for the national anthem to be sung in assemblies has been rejected.
Labour councillors in Calderdale, supported by the Liberal Democrats, rejected the idea of flying the Union Flag on public buildings as “inappropriate”.
Coun Benton said these things, we were assured, were likely to make us more divisive and ‘promote nasty, nationalistic tendencies’
The former Labour communications chief said Mr Corbyn was now in 'the big league' and that he will 'discover everything he’s done and everything he said is going to be brought up'
He should have been in the big league when he stood for the leadership. Bizarrely no-one really brought all this up until most of the electorate had voted. It's obvious why the right-wing media were sitting on their hands, but where were the attacks in the Guardian, Indy and Mirror, and the condemnation from Burnham, Cooper and Kendall?
So it seems the big league is only when you play with the Tories (and the SNP). About right, looking at the political landscape today.
The mindset of many, and particularly many on the left, is that if you suppress discussion of something then it's as good as not happening. They therefore denied Corbyn the oxygen of publicity in the hope that by doing so he'd go away. To have responded would have legitimised his position as a credible candidate, which ignored the fact that votes also legitimised that position.
Burnham et al were complacent and hubristic. And when they realised the trouble they were in they were unwilling to say what needed to be said about Corbyn, as DC did so brutally yesterday. Cowardice and complacency are not a good combination.
They deserved to lose. A pity all of them couldn't have lost.
Absolutely. Burnham and Mrs Balls were like rabbits caught in headlights. I omit Kendall because she did speak out a bit but from a position where she knew she was screwed whatever happened. I still find it hard to believe that the PLP introduced a system where they were supposed to be the firebreak but then decided that it wasn't necessary. Labour won't be trusted for years by anyone other than green eyed lefties of limited savvy.
flightpath01.. Where else could some extreme commie expect to get a job paying in total ..up to 200k a year for spouting bullshit..any where else would see right through him and he would have been on JSA or its equivalent for the last 30 years..another one is Skinner..both are a TWOS..
Three month window here will be interesting - probably in a slo-mo car crash way
It is, to be fair, a little early to conclude that the Corbyn effect is as puny as this suggests. Matt Singh’s work for The Times suggests that the positive effect of any new leader peaks at around the three month mark, before declining gradually thereafter. So we need to come back and revisit this question in December, when on past evidence we would expect Labour to have put on about five per cent. If they haven’t, or if they have indeed stood still or gone backwards, our initial foreboding based on these numbers will have been borne out. For now, the weakest polling boost in the recent history of Labour’s new Opposition leaders is something to record in itself.
"We should all be cautious before reaching any firm conclusions. The data is still fragmented, patchy and scarce. But from what we do know, and what we can already see, only one judgement is possible: Labour has somehow found the best possible way to concentrate votes and strength where it cannot use them or does not need them, and give ground where it desperately needs to make it up. If it continues on the path it has set itself, the very early evidence suggests that Labour is going to be mauled in 2020, perhaps very badly. The party has conspired to locate precisely what might be called its bitter spot. This equates to the exact place where they make the least possible gain of MPs for votes: the opposite of that sweet spot the Conservatives managed to find in 2015, converting ballots into seats in a more efficient way than they have managed for decades. It is a bitterness Labour is probably going to have to get used to."
Is it only me who couldn't care less about Corbyn not seeing the Queen for his induction to the Privy Council?
The fact is that Corbyn doesn't want to bend the knee to the Queen as he's a committed republican and quite frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the Queen feels the same back. Not only that but an Order in Council as an alternative is not only possible but happens fairly often, just not normally for senior politicians.
Yes Corbyn could attend a ceremony and cross his fingers behind his back or something similar but to do it by Order in Council rather than a confrontation with the monarch seems like a reasonably civil face-saving compromise for everyone. There are bigger issues than this. Like any other issue.
It's the carp PR: he's throwing hostages to the wolves when he does not need to..
A Conservative Councillor’s proposals for the Union Jack flag to be flown at schools across Calderdale and for the national anthem to be sung in assemblies has been rejected.
Labour councillors in Calderdale, supported by the Liberal Democrats, rejected the idea of flying the Union Flag on public buildings as “inappropriate”.
Coun Benton said these things, we were assured, were likely to make us more divisive and ‘promote nasty, nationalistic tendencies’
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
It is not 'the undecided'. The Quisling reference was to those who are actively pro EU rather than just unsure - the Tory Europhiles - and came as part of the discussion about strongly pro EU Tory MPs. TSE decided to include himself in the description as a classic case of playing the victim. If he wants to be considered a Quisling that is his affair. But in the terms of the discussion that implies he is no longer open to persuasion in any way.
Three month window here will be interesting - probably in a slo-mo car crash way
It is, to be fair, a little early to conclude that the Corbyn effect is as puny as this suggests. Matt Singh’s work for The Times suggests that the positive effect of any new leader peaks at around the three month mark, before declining gradually thereafter. So we need to come back and revisit this question in December, when on past evidence we would expect Labour to have put on about five per cent. If they haven’t, or if they have indeed stood still or gone backwards, our initial foreboding based on these numbers will have been borne out. For now, the weakest polling boost in the recent history of Labour’s new Opposition leaders is something to record in itself.
"We should all be cautious before reaching any firm conclusions. The data is still fragmented, patchy and scarce. But from what we do know, and what we can already see, only one judgement is possible: Labour has somehow found the best possible way to concentrate votes and strength where it cannot use them or does not need them, and give ground where it desperately needs to make it up. If it continues on the path it has set itself, the very early evidence suggests that Labour is going to be mauled in 2020, perhaps very badly. The party has conspired to locate precisely what might be called its bitter spot. This equates to the exact place where they make the least possible gain of MPs for votes: the opposite of that sweet spot the Conservatives managed to find in 2015, converting ballots into seats in a more efficient way than they have managed for decades. It is a bitterness Labour is probably going to have to get used to."
Hague and IDS and arguably Howard also got no bounce. The bounces for Labour under Foot and Ed Miliband happened before they were elected
A Conservative Councillor’s proposals for the Union Jack flag to be flown at schools across Calderdale and for the national anthem to be sung in assemblies has been rejected.
Labour councillors in Calderdale, supported by the Liberal Democrats, rejected the idea of flying the Union Flag on public buildings as “inappropriate”.
Coun Benton said these things, we were assured, were likely to make us more divisive and ‘promote nasty, nationalistic tendencies’
"We should all be cautious before reaching any firm conclusions. The data is still fragmented, patchy and scarce. But from what we do know, and what we can already see, only one judgement is possible: Labour has somehow found the best possible way to concentrate votes and strength where it cannot use them or does not need them, and give ground where it desperately needs to make it up. If it continues on the path it has set itself, the very early evidence suggests that Labour is going to be mauled in 2020, perhaps very badly. The party has conspired to locate precisely what might be called its bitter spot. This equates to the exact place where they make the least possible gain of MPs for votes: the opposite of that sweet spot the Conservatives managed to find in 2015, converting ballots into seats in a more efficient way than they have managed for decades. It is a bitterness Labour is probably going to have to get used to."
Excellent piece by Professor O'Hara
Hopefully we should be seeing some pieces by him on PB on a regular basis
Is it only me who couldn't care less about Corbyn not seeing the Queen for his induction to the Privy Council?
The fact is that Corbyn doesn't want to bend the knee to the Queen as he's a committed republican and quite frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the Queen feels the same back. Not only that but an Order in Council as an alternative is not only possible but happens fairly often, just not normally for senior politicians.
Yes Corbyn could attend a ceremony and cross his fingers behind his back or something similar but to do it by Order in Council rather than a confrontation with the monarch seems like a reasonably civil face-saving compromise for everyone. There are bigger issues than this. Like any other issue.
It's the carp PR: he's throwing hostages to the wolves when he does not need to..
Him saying he'd never press the button under any circumstances, sees no use for the military as a whole and that the death of Osama Bin Laden was a tragedy ... those are unforgivable. Responding to an archaic institution by going for an option of an Order In Council which already has precedent? Not such a big deal.
If there was no option for an Order in Council and that was unprecedented it would be different. But he's not even breaking precedent here. This is just froth.
My preference for Leave is based on politics, not economics. Whether the UK Leaves or Remains, it will remain a wealthy country. Or if it doesn't, it will be down to daft economic policies, rather than being a member of the EU or not.
I do however, strongly believe that the UK is as capable of governing itself as are countries like Australia, Canada, or New Zealand, and that EU institutions are bent on accumulating power to themselves at the expense of national political institutions. That seems undemocratic to me, and I see no sign of that changing.
For those who are worried, I see no reason at all to believe that a Leave vote would be followed by UKIP sweeping to power.
Corbyn has announced he that can't attend this evening's Privy Council meeting because he's travelling to a Labour fund raising event in Scotland tomorrow.
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
It is not 'the undecided'. The Quisling reference was to those who are actively pro EU rather than just unsure - the Tory Europhiles - and came as part of the discussion about strongly pro EU Tory MPs. TSE decided to include himself in the description as a classic case of playing the victim. If he wants to be considered a Quisling that is his affair. But in the terms of the discussion that implies he is no longer open to persuasion in any way.
My preference for Leave is based on politics, not economics. Whether the UK Leaves or Remains, it will remain a wealthy country. Or if it doesn't, it will be down to daft economic policies, rather than being a member of the EU or not.
I do however, strongly believe that the UK is as capable of governing itself as are countries like Australia, Canada, or New Zealand, and that EU institutions are bent on accumulating power to themselves at the expense of national political institutions. That seems undemocratic to me, and I see no sign of that changing.
I agree with you.
I was a marginal Remain/In, but I have watched the EU and just don't trust them.
Cameron may surprise with the negotiations, but it would have to be something seismic, so I'm not expecting anything to change my view.
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
It is not 'the undecided'. The Quisling reference was to those who are actively pro EU rather than just unsure - the Tory Europhiles - and came as part of the discussion about strongly pro EU Tory MPs. TSE decided to include himself in the description as a classic case of playing the victim. If he wants to be considered a Quisling that is his affair. But in the terms of the discussion that implies he is no longer open to persuasion in any way.
Three month window here will be interesting - probably in a slo-mo car crash way
It is, to be fair, a little early to conclude that the Corbyn effect is as puny as this suggests. Matt Singh’s work for The Times suggests that the positive effect of any new leader peaks at around the three month mark, before declining gradually thereafter. So we need to come back and revisit this question in December, when on past evidence we would expect Labour to have put on about five per cent. If they haven’t, or if they have indeed stood still or gone backwards, our initial foreboding based on these numbers will have been borne out. For now, the weakest polling boost in the recent history of Labour’s new Opposition leaders is something to record in itself.
"We should all be cautious before reaching any firm conclusions. The data is still fragmented, patchy and scarce. But from what we do know, and what we can already see, only one judgement is possible: Labour has somehow found the best possible way to concentrate votes and strength where it cannot use them or does not need them, and give ground where it desperately needs to make it up. If it continues on the path it has set itself, the very early evidence suggests that Labour is going to be mauled in 2020, perhaps very badly. The party has conspired to locate precisely what might be called its bitter spot. This equates to the exact place where they make the least possible gain of MPs for votes: the opposite of that sweet spot the Conservatives managed to find in 2015, converting ballots into seats in a more efficient way than they have managed for decades. It is a bitterness Labour is probably going to have to get used to."
Hague and IDS and arguably Howard also got no bounce. The bounces for Labour under Foot and Ed Miliband happened before they were elected
Yes and what was the result? IMO 2001 was a worse election result for the Tories than 1997 - in 1997 the party was bitterly divided, tired and in power for nearly two decades. A halfway decent leader (Hague as he is now would count) could and should have been able to make some progress on that, but besides the fuel strikes of 2000 no dent was ever made and there was no real seat change in 2001.
IDS would probably not have recorded the seat changes that Howard did while Miliband was so crap he lost seats and the government gained seats and share for the first time since the nineteenth century (!) - and Foot presided over what is currently the worst election result for the modern Labour Party.
For the new Labour Party to be worse than that company. Wow.
What event led you to abandon the Communist Party?
I was a Eurocommunist in my teens - the idea being to get the ideals without the totalitarianism (which is why SeanT ranting about Pol Pot etc. isn't too relevant). "From each according to ability, to each according to need" seemed to me exactly how one should try to live (I haven't changed that belief), and as far as possible I wanted to help organise society on that basis.
It seemed possible for a while, and then it became evident that it wasn't going to work: too much bleak history in Eastern Europe casting its shadow. I'm not sure there was a specific event, merely that I grew up, looked around, and decided social democracy was a more viable ambition. I joined Labour on my 21st birthday.
Incidentally, I don't think Corbyn was ever a Communist. Bit of a right-winger really. :-)
There's only one real everlasting political conflict - the populace vs. those who would wield and abuse power over them. That power in the hands of the few can manifest itself in kings, corporations, banks, billionaires, or states - the latter being one of the most deadly and pernicious.
Can I suggest that religion (of any hue but particularly Islam) has a strong claim to be the most powerful and pernicious wielder and abuser of power over people. There cannot be a benevolent God because with a benevolent God there could be no religion.
A very interesting point, and one that I would half agree with. To take the example of Roman Catholicism, to have one fallible human who is a virtual spiritual dictator whose word is law and whose decrees are rigidly promulgated by a priesthood does strike me as problematic, yes, especially in some instances in the past.
But to have a direct relationship with God through access to the Bible, unmediated by anyone else who is not invited into that relationship, and dictated only by the conscience of the individual, cannot be considered an abuse of power. I think in many cases, the decline in organised religion has been detrimental to real freedom, as with it has gone the nuclear family, and a sense of moral duty and social obligation - the major bulwarks against society declining and falling under tyranny. And (not) coincidentally, the things that socialism seeks to destroy and replace.
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
It is not 'the undecided'. The Quisling reference was to those who are actively pro EU rather than just unsure - the Tory Europhiles - and came as part of the discussion about strongly pro EU Tory MPs. TSE decided to include himself in the description as a classic case of playing the victim. If he wants to be considered a Quisling that is his affair. But in the terms of the discussion that implies he is no longer open to persuasion in any way.
Are you open to persuasion?
No. And your point is?
Why is it wrong for TSE to imply he is not open to persuasion and thus a traitor to his country collaborating with an enemy force but it is perfectly OK for you to not be open to persuasion?
I wonder what Labour moderates are going to do now? The Tories were left marooned when Tony did it to them.
A single speech cannot change the political landscape. But this wasn’t just a speech. David Cameron has just erected an impenetrable forcefield around the centre ground of British politics. It’s now impossible for anyone on the progressive Left to construct an intellectually coherent argument for voting Labour. That situation will not last indefinitely, and it will be interesting to see how New Conservatism reacts when it has to fight for territory, rather than have it simply ceded to it by its opponents.
I see that the ongoing decline of UKIP has not yet penetrated the DT readership. Comments are basically that Cameron is traitor/lightweight/liar/socialist
The ongoing decline to 17% in the last poll from a quadrupling of their vote share in May?
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure you can claim polling projection as 'FACT'. Now recent local and general election results......
I thought the general election result was a fair reference point?
I obviously didn't use the poll that had UKIP on 17% as that would extrapolate to the Tories being on 51%... Tut tut
No I think the point he is making is that polls are not a fact. They are as this election showed at best a guess.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
Yes and the point I am making is that, at the election, Ukip got one vote for every three the conservatives got... How can this be difficult to understand?
Easy to understand - just utterly pointless. The kippers certainly haven't been turning out in local by-elections since May - maybe they've been meeting too many Tories
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
It is not 'the undecided'. The Quisling reference was to those who are actively pro EU rather than just unsure - the Tory Europhiles - and came as part of the discussion about strongly pro EU Tory MPs. TSE decided to include himself in the description as a classic case of playing the victim. If he wants to be considered a Quisling that is his affair. But in the terms of the discussion that implies he is no longer open to persuasion in any way.
Do you not think that implicitly equating the EU to the Third Reich, as you do with your Quisling comments, you're over-egging it a touch?
Comments
The TNS poll, carried out in September after Kezia Dugdale and Jeremy Corbyn were elected as leaders, shows little or no “bounce” effect for Labour.
For the constituency vote in the city’s eight seats the SNP were on 54% with Labour trailing on 24%. The LibDems were one point ahead of the Tories on 8% and 7% respectively.
For the second “list” vote the SNP were still the highest party on 33% with Labour on 19%. The Green third on 4% and the Tories on 3% with the LibDems looking unlikely to regain a Glasgow MSP on just 2%. Almost one in five 18% were undecided and 14% said they would not vote.'
http://tinyurl.com/ob44chy
Mystifying why Unionist superwoman Ruth Davidson has suddenly discovered a deep love for Edinburgh.
Eurocrats to pry into UK's vote to monitor in-out progress and plan a Propaganda blitz - well we know what happened in the last 'Blitz'.
Lets hope they still use Dorniers Do17 and Heinkels 111.
I don't take the Party seriously at all with him in charge. There's too many examples of his personality picking a fight with his own side. I feel rather sorry for Carswell, Evans and O'Flynn.
Like the laughing policeman at Corbyn, the gift that goes on giving.
For every three Tories you meet you will meet a kipper, FACT
Not sure that's quite right. Most Kippers are too afraid to go outside - so you don't meet them....
I think your last statement is an unreasonable worry, however. Just because we leave the EU doesn't mean that we get UKIP coming to power. They will always represent a minority of public opinion. The people negotiating what the UK looks like after a Brexit would be David Cameron or his successor. Osborne or Hammond probably.
Too many foreigners on the streets, and they have to wait in for the lovely young Polish lady with the Meals on Wheels.
I obviously didn't use the poll that had UKIP on 17% as that would extrapolate to the Tories being on 51%... Tut tut
No I think the point he is making is that polls are not a fact. They are as this election showed at best a guess.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
It's funny the way people here stereotype kippers as old fogeys... Ever been to a PB drink?!!
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
It will be really important to have two multi-party campaigns as well as those aimed at existing supporters, probably with different people fronting. Hannan's support of Europe but dislike for the EU as a corrupt institution deserves a wider audience, although to most he's probably best known for his takedown of Gordon Brown a few years back which won't endear him too much to Labour supporters.
EDIT: Though for every UKIP MP you meet you would meet 330 Tory MPs
Yes and the point I am making is that, at the election, Ukip got one vote for every three the conservatives got... How can this be difficult to understand?
If Leave becomes associated with projecting a post-leave Britain which is anti gay-marriage, anti-immigrant, 'little Englander' - then (in my opinion) that will be very negative as there is a limited number of people who would vote for that. (and I would be tempted to move back to Remain)
Much better for the main Leave campaign to focus on disadvantages of staying, and of projecting a positive vision of choice for the future. (ie what post leave looks like depends on the people - but it is at least their choice, not that of unelected eurocrats)
'Well said. Those in the middle third of the spectrum of views on EU membership are really not persuaded by the arguments made by either Farage or Clegg. Those advocating one way or the other need to make their case to the undecideds, not their own loyal fans. '
Clegg was telling us that if we didn't join the Euro we would lose 3 million jobs etc.the fact that the exact opposite is the reality means he has zero credibility and 'Stay' should keep him well away from the campaign.
Whilst i'm not a fan of Farage it won't stop me voting to leave, but certainly a more credible leader would help with the undecided.
If voters are bothered about the current high levels of immigration ,and the polls suggest they are,then 'Leave' is the only option.
Absolute moral certainty combined with vituperation of the unpersuaded is an over rated selling technique.......
Like many of my generation i was - and remain - in favour of a 'Common Market' - but since attempts to extend that beyond goods to services (where we have a competitive advantage) is persistently delayed or blocked I grow weary of the whole thing.
Add to that the CAP - as the ECONOMIST once marvellously described 'to the French, the EU's crowning glory, to the British a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction' - which we gave up a chunk of our rebate for a reform that never happened, and I wonder.
I suspect this migrant mess - exacerbated by (who says they haven't got a sense of humour, possible Nobel prize winner) Merkel has shifted many 'on balance stay' towards 'leave'.....
I find that there are far too many ideologues on both sides. UKIP would never accept EU membership even if we got a fantastic renegotiation. Labour and the Lib Dems would never support leaving even if we became a pure satellite state of a united Eurozone. I would usually listen to the Conservative leadership, except for the fact they have been very dishonest on their claims in the past, and they can seem more driven by political concerns rather than the long term good of the country.
The people I will be mainly listening to are the backbench Conservative MPs that aren't longstanding BOOers.
Leave can only win by getting the votes of moderates and so it follows that there won't be a majority of little England gay hating islamaphobes in charge
I understood it I just don't particularly care. At the election the share of protest votes of which UKIP are a part of went down rather than up. At the election the share of protest seats of which UKIP are a part of went down rather than up. At the election my parties share of the vote went up. At the election my parties share of seats went up.
The underlying them of this week was not to be complacent and though there will always be protest votes, we're doing what we can to win a majority. We are not a "moral crusade or nothing" party, we are a pragmatic party and need to continue to be pragmatic and build a bigger tent in the centre to centre-right of British politics using sound money and social justice. It is both what I want to vote for and what I believe the country will vote for.
I spent a lovely evening with a young polish lady on Monday... She was a bit racist though
Was she fixing your boiler?
I suspect that there was also an element of game-playing: had Burnham launched a broadside against Corbyn, even had it hit the mark, the effect may well have been to benefit the candidate who didn't engage in uncomradely action, namely Cooper. So neither Cooper nor Burnham did get into that game until it was far too late; indeed, Burnham never got into it at all.
Arguing over a simple statement of fact drawn from a general election result
Ukip votes weren't really UKIP votes
Every Tory vote was a positive vote for the Tories
Honestly you're a bit of a joke
Would add that calls for surrendering the rebate etc will start about 5 minutes after the exit poll is announced.
That toxicity will not win a referendum. If he is centre of the Out campaign, then the smart bet is to lay Out.
Sorry to hear Mrs Isam is not well
On what planet is Luton born Nadia a 'foreigner'?
She was cleaning the pipes
It is not what he is saying now. He appeared very bitter and aggressive on This Week and made crystal clear that he wanted to be at the forefront of the Out campaign and that BOO Conservatives should let him take charge.
Months ago he wasn't like that I agree. He is now. I honestly feel he has lost the plot, it is tough for anyone being at the forefront of politics and he has been for his side for a very long time now. I don't think he expected to fail so badly in May (in his own seat especially let alone other candidates) and I don't think he has recovered from that defeat. He is becoming bitter and smallminded, just plain toxic. Sooner he is gone, the better chance Out has of winning.
Charming.
I'd take my worst over your best
Farage is all about - only about - Farage. He is skin stretched tight over an enormous ego. That he chooses to parade himself to the public on one of the biggest issues facing the country is natural, but his presence debases the debate. There will indeed be good numbers of people who will find it difficult to vote LEAVE if they know that means a gurning, self-satisfied Farage plastered over their TV screens the next day.
Spoiler: it was stolen by its owner from his own stud farm as it turned out to be gay
41:45 look who has popped up next to Mr Anthony Wedgwood-Benn, Mr Jeremy Corbyn.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06kcc1g/denis-healey-the-best-prime-minister-labour-never-had
Anyway, if we're going to send the immigrants back we should do it alphabetically.
Starting with the Angles....
My missus summed it up for me today on the queen thing.
Corbyn, 66 going on 16...
Few things are worse in politics than pity though. He's served his party and his cause with distinction in the past and deserves a retirement from that and perhaps then he could play a major role in the referendum as a UKIP "big beast"/"elder statesmen".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34475393
I'm curious about personality politics, I'm convinced most people don't vote on policy.
What we see is that there are still safe areas in Syria. Incredible really after all we have seen and heard.
So, it's not a principled stand, it's just a hissy fit
Fairly soon after? These things are already happening:
Common Taxes:
"France and Germany are pushing plans to introduce a minimum corporation tax rate across the continent, it was reported today, in a move that could result in higher taxes on British companies. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11630468/France-and-Germany-behind-plans-for-common-EU-corporation-tax.html
Common Army:
"Angela Merkel will expect David Cameron to drop his opposition to an EU army in exchange for supporting Britain’s renegotiation, the Telegraph has been told.
The German chancellor will ask Britain to stand aside as she promotes an ambitious blueprint to integrate continental Europe’s armed forces. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/11861247/Merkel-expects-Cameron-to-back-EU-army-in-exchange-for-renegotiation.html
Common Migration policy:
they've been working on this for years. "Since 1999, the EU has been developing a common immigration policy for Europe.
EU countries have agreed that the EU should have common, or EU-wide, immigration and visa rules that will be valid all across the EU, in the 27 EU countries."
http://ec.europa.eu/immigration/who-does-what/more-information/explaining-the-rules-why-are-there-eu-rules-and-national-rules_en
They'll understand we've voted to stay in as part of an EU Single Market but not an EU Ever Closer Union. Even though that phrase is pretty meaningless on its own, the fact that Cameron has brought it front and centre as a case of "no to Ever Closer Union" (even in his speech yesterday which got a polite round of applause not a standing ovation for that).
There is no way to reconcile the UK saying "we'll stay in but not going ever closer" to turn around and say "OK you want a European Superstate". Until today we've always been signed up to the phrase Ever Closer Union and this is an unambiguous change of direction.
I expect the "outrageous" things you've suggested will be done at a Eurozone level. This doesn't just remove us from being concerned but other nations like Denmark who would veto it too.
My biggest concern and biggest doubt is if there is no reform to QMV then what is to stop the Eurozone bloc deciding a position then forcing it through without us getting a say? At the moment that's not too big of a worry as the Eurozone is not homogenous and we can get our way by playing some Eurozone nations we agree with against those we disagree with. If they continue to unify then we could find ourselves being outvoted all the time and if that were to happen I would reconsider my position. But we're not there yet and I'm hoping this is part of Cameron's renegotiation (if it is I'd find it easier to vote stay).
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/elections/2015/10/month-what-jeremy-corbyn-effect
"We should all be cautious before reaching any firm conclusions. The data is still fragmented, patchy and scarce. But from what we do know, and what we can already see, only one judgement is possible: Labour has somehow found the best possible way to concentrate votes and strength where it cannot use them or does not need them, and give ground where it desperately needs to make it up. If it continues on the path it has set itself, the very early evidence suggests that Labour is going to be mauled in 2020, perhaps very badly. The party has conspired to locate precisely what might be called its bitter spot. This equates to the exact place where they make the least possible gain of MPs for votes: the opposite of that sweet spot the Conservatives managed to find in 2015, converting ballots into seats in a more efficient way than they have managed for decades. It is a bitterness Labour is probably going to have to get used to."
Labour councillors in Calderdale, supported by the Liberal Democrats, rejected the idea of flying the Union Flag on public buildings as “inappropriate”.
Coun Benton said these things, we were assured, were likely to make us more divisive and ‘promote nasty, nationalistic tendencies’
http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/calderdale/union-jack-flag-plans-for-calderdale-schools-rejected-1-7494118
Should be easy enough to find out what it is.
Maybe it’;s “only" keeping a promise long made!
"41:45 look who has popped up next to Mr Anthony Wedgwood-Benn, Mr Jeremy Corbyn.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06kcc1g/denis-healey-the-best-prime-minister-labour-never-had"
I saw that. Healey reminded me of why I used to vote Labour. Jezza makes me glad I don't now.
The fact is that Corbyn doesn't want to bend the knee to the Queen as he's a committed republican and quite frankly I wouldn't be surprised if the Queen feels the same back. Not only that but an Order in Council as an alternative is not only possible but happens fairly often, just not normally for senior politicians.
Yes Corbyn could attend a ceremony and cross his fingers behind his back or something similar but to do it by Order in Council rather than a confrontation with the monarch seems like a reasonably civil face-saving compromise for everyone. There are bigger issues than this. Like any other issue.
I had not heard about the common corporation tax one. That could be very damaging to the UK economy.
near-perfect iced buns and millefeuille......[and] a patriotic, Union Jack-themed wedding cake
As 'culturally British'?
Or a 'foreigner' as surbiton did?
http://labourlist.org/2015/10/jeremy-corbyn-campaigners-set-up-new-momentum-group/
Fancy using such a capitalist structure.
Many public buildings do fly ythe Union Flag already.
Hague and IDS and arguably Howard also got no bounce. The bounces for Labour under Foot and Ed Miliband happened before they were elected
Hopefully we should be seeing some pieces by him on PB on a regular basis
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/privy-council-relevant-for-first-time-since-1659-20151008102745
Him saying he'd never press the button under any circumstances, sees no use for the military as a whole and that the death of Osama Bin Laden was a tragedy ... those are unforgivable. Responding to an archaic institution by going for an option of an Order In Council which already has precedent? Not such a big deal.
If there was no option for an Order in Council and that was unprecedented it would be different. But he's not even breaking precedent here. This is just froth.
I do however, strongly believe that the UK is as capable of governing itself as are countries like Australia, Canada, or New Zealand, and that EU institutions are bent on accumulating power to themselves at the expense of national political institutions. That seems undemocratic to me, and I see no sign of that changing.
For those who are worried, I see no reason at all to believe that a Leave vote would be followed by UKIP sweeping to power.
I agree with you.
I was a marginal Remain/In, but I have watched the EU and just don't trust them.
Cameron may surprise with the negotiations, but it would have to be something seismic, so I'm not expecting anything to change my view.
Yes and what was the result? IMO 2001 was a worse election result for the Tories than 1997 - in 1997 the party was bitterly divided, tired and in power for nearly two decades. A halfway decent leader (Hague as he is now would count) could and should have been able to make some progress on that, but besides the fuel strikes of 2000 no dent was ever made and there was no real seat change in 2001.
IDS would probably not have recorded the seat changes that Howard did while Miliband was so crap he lost seats and the government gained seats and share for the first time since the nineteenth century (!) - and Foot presided over what is currently the worst election result for the modern Labour Party.
For the new Labour Party to be worse than that company. Wow.
But to have a direct relationship with God through access to the Bible, unmediated by anyone else who is not invited into that relationship, and dictated only by the conscience of the individual, cannot be considered an abuse of power. I think in many cases, the decline in organised religion has been detrimental to real freedom, as with it has gone the nuclear family, and a sense of moral duty and social obligation - the major bulwarks against society declining and falling under tyranny. And (not) coincidentally, the things that socialism seeks to destroy and replace.
Easy to understand - just utterly pointless. The kippers certainly haven't been turning out in local by-elections since May - maybe they've been meeting too many Tories