I only get emails inviting me to local CLP meetings - I may have got one about tax credits - but that's it. I've had about four from CCHQ telling me the Tory side of the story re Autumn Statement and a couple of votes.
All in all - I get 20x as many from Millets offering me sale deals.
You are speaking to the already-convinced and repelling the people who remain to be convinced. Sadly, it's the latter group you need to be talking to and attracting.
Nah, he is talking here on PB, there is no "remain to be convinced" here, and not the slightest chance of changing anyone's views. There are just inners and outers now, even the "undecided" got their email from CCHQ last night telling them that Dave is now for IN regardless of the results of his renegotiation.
I'm undecided, although leaning towards leave. I daresay you won't believe me.
Maybe your email is running a bit slow today
I get more emails from Labour than I do the Conservatives.
What do Labour e-mails typically say?
There are fewer now than there were in the run-up to the GE, but most seem to be about individual campaigns. TBF they seem clearer and outwardly more compelling than the Conservative ones.
Emails from both parties get deleted rather rapidly after a quick perusal ...
Cameron could act as a useful lightning rod for discontent (useful because he's off soon), or it might be a case of the issue dominating the ensuing leadership campaign to the detriment of the party. Ultimately there are only two courses: stay in, or leave [the latter requiring another vote]. Endless bitching within the Conservative Party would only create division.
That might have worked until it was put about that George was running the negotiation strategy, which in retrospect he might come to rue.
Every bit of EU idiocy in the next decade, and you can be there is a bath full of it being kept quiet until after the referendum (all sorts of embarrassments and cock-ups will have been kept under wraps for a year or so), will be dropped on the Tory leaderships lap by both the press and pissed off activists.
If there is some important business decision that happens to our detriment because we are outvoted by the Eurozone, or worse a mandatory quote for migrants, all hell is going to break loose and the finger is going to be pointed firmly at the Dave & George Show.
Like I said. Only the Blues are split over Europe. Hell hath no fury like a kipper scorned.
Now.
Mr and Mrs TwoPointFourKids in Acacia Avenue will probably vote Remain because they are not that interested, and that nice man Mr Cameron came on the TV and told them everything will be okay and they can trust him. They are not Tories, although they will probably vote Tory because they are repelled by Corbyn and Farage for differing reasons.
Those same sort of quiet suburban voters, largely apolitical, small 'C conservative, community based people, are going be absolutely furious if the UK gets forced by the EU to take a huge load of economic migrants (or any of a number of actions that looks like the country being screwed over by the EU) and are going to blame Dave for lying to them, and most of the newspapers (irrespective of their IN or OUT stand will line up to say the same thing)
They won't though. They won't be furious, and beyond some token moaning, nor will the papers. The myth of the suburban British middle class being pushed beyond the limits of politeness is just that. The reality is that bullying makes you more passive, not more aggressive. If there were a 'limit' we would have reached it long ago.
As long as house prices keep going up, what's not to like? A lot of the politics in this country is dictated by this metric.
Cameron and Blair were alike in that they gave the impression of meaning well - a useful asset for a politician - and also that as their red lines are few, they will bend to the pressure of public opinion. You may not agree with what they're doing, but it's mostly not done on ideological grounds.
As long as they give an air of competence, they'll get enough middle of the road voters.
Blair went badly awry on Iraq, both on it being ideological and on the competence issue. Cameron does have an ideological view of the EU (that doesn't mater), but giving pledges on immigration (no ifs, no buts) and failing by a factor of three doesn't look good on competence - it begins to look like an ideological viewpoint
Ozzie has none of the other twos trust or competence ratings, and Jezza is a loon, but Corbyn will step down when he's swung Labour round to an ideological party. If Osborne becomes PM, it will be a triumph for the less unelectable.
We tend to elect the "don't scare the horses" PM unless there's a perceived crisis (as in '79) - and Jezza is a horse-scarer par excellence. There is no crisis, he can't make worse.
EU? It's Cameron's to lose. But he's doing his best.
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
Although they won't, I'd like the leave campaign to have a poster/broadcast that implied that by voting to leave the EU we could provoke the Scots into having another referendum and potentially leaving the UK. Two birds, one stone. What's not to like?!
Yup. Independence for England - from Brussels and from Malc. Wahooo!
Scotland isn't malc though, although that is what the snp would like you to believe. The loony CNers in the SNP and in England would like an independent Scotland since they would see it as a way to remove the deterrent.
Much the same as the pre EURef team I'd imagine - as long as it’s a free vote for MPs.
1st.
No it is not. The Tories are going to have a bitter split over an issue in which passions run high. All the other parties will be united, even the fissile kippers. Something that both Kendallites and Corbynites can agree on is that Britain should Remain in the EU.
Define split. – do you think the Tories will physically split over the EU as Labour did when the SDP broke away, or do you mean there will be lots of grumbling from the 1922 committee?
No, not split. But there will be an awful lot of recrimination if SeanT's prophecy comes to pass and the EU starts doing outrageous things as soon as the UK is safely confirmed as "Remain" again. Which I personally think (sadly) isn't unlikely.
That would not be good for Osborne, for instance.
It would be hard for the Remain to marshal an argument against the EU doing things that we consider outrageous. After all, that's what Remain want us to sign up for.
It would be hard for the Leavers to marshall an argument against the EU doing things that we consider outrageous should we Leave. After all that is what Leave want us to sign up for: no influence at all on policy making on our continent.
That is a very weak argument.
The UK, the second richest member of the EU, is on the verge of leaving, some polls make it too close to call, and yet the ability of our politicians to get any sort of concession from the EU on the most trivial of matters has been close to zero.
How do you rate our chances of getting any sort of concession from the EU the day after Remain win the referendum ?
I do not want any concessions. The EU is an evolving organisation and I see our relationship with it in far more constructive terms. I think that a vote to Remain would help restructure the EU in a positive way.
There is very little evidence of the EC reforming in a positive way. Just look at the CAP! Blair was promised major reform of the CAP if we gave up half our rebate and we were stitched up on that...
Cameron should be worrying about the legacy is he leaving behind. 1. Is he to be the PM who presented such a poor deal with the EC that the voters rejected him and left the EC? Or 2. Is he to be the PM who kept us in the EC but broke his party apart through his "loading the dice" against the eurosceptics? Currently he just seems to be worrying about how to Remain and get Osborne as his successor. History may not be kind to him with those aims.
It seems to me that How Cameron is viewed on here fits in nicely with personal likes/prejudices
I doubt for one second that Cameron is trying to engineer GO into NO 10. I think GO is doing that all by himself..
Much the same as the pre EURef team I'd imagine - as long as it’s a free vote for MPs.
1st.
No it is not. The Tories are going to have a bitter split over an issue in which passions run high. All the other parties will be united, even the fissile kippers. Something that both Kendallites and Corbynites can agree on is that Britain should Remain in the EU.
Define split. – do you think the Tories will physically split over the EU as Labour did when the SDP broke away, or do you mean there will be lots of grumbling from the 1922 committee?
No, not split. But there will be an awful lot of recrimination if SeanT's prophecy comes to pass and the EU starts doing outrageous things as soon as the UK is safely confirmed as "Remain" again. Which I personally think (sadly) isn't unlikely.
That would not be good for Osborne, for instance.
It would be hard for the Remain to marshal an argument against the EU doing things that we consider outrageous. After all, that's what Remain want us to sign up for.
It would be hard for the Leavers to marshall an argument against the EU doing things that we consider outrageous should we Leave. After all that is what Leave want us to sign up for: no influence at all on policy making on our continent.
I don't want influence over policy-making in foreign countries. I'm happy to respect their sovereignty, if they respect ours.
It's actually turning out to be more simplistic than that, the money tree shakers want to remain, the realists want to leave, rosette colour is irrelevant.
And that attitude will be part of the reason why 'leave' loses.
It'll be the opposite, you think conservative voters are going to read the Times this morning and raise a glass to those poor EU bureaucrats?
I was talking about your attitude, as shown by your post above. It's playground stuff: people who agree with your position are realists; those who disagree with your position are "money tree shakers"
You are speaking to the already-convinced and repelling the people who remain to be convinced. Sadly, it's the latter group you need to be talking to and attracting.
I can easily see how honourable, sensible and intelligent people could want to remain with no obvious direct advantage to themselves, just as I can see honourable, sensible and intelligent people wanting to leave with no obvious direct advantage to themselves.
You grant me too much credibility, I'm an ordinary bloke sounding off on the internet. Not one person on here will change their mind because of anything I say, I just pass away a bit of time chiding tribalists.
And do me a favour and get off your high horse I've been regularly abused and insulted on here (including by you) and never complained, stop whining like a little girl.
Cameron could act as a useful lightning rod for discontent (useful because he's off soon), or it might be a case of the issue dominating the ensuing leadership campaign to the detriment of the party. Ultimately there are only two courses: stay in, or leave [the latter requiring another vote]. Endless bitching within the Conservative Party would only create division.
That might have worked until it was put about that George was running the negotiation strategy, which in retrospect he might come to rue.
Every bit of EU idiocy in the next decade, and you can be there is a bath full of it being kept quiet until after the referendum (all sorts of embarrassments and cock-ups will have been kept under wraps for a year or so), will be dropped on the Tory leaderships lap by both the press and pissed off activists.
If there is some important business decision that happens to our detriment because we are outvoted by the Eurozone, or worse a mandatory quote for migrants, all hell is going to break loose and the finger is going to be pointed firmly at the Dave & George Show.
Like I said. Only the Blues are split over Europe. Hell hath no fury like a kipper scorned.
Now.
Mr and Mrs TwoPointFourKids in Acacia Avenue will probably vote Remain because they are not that interested, and that nice man Mr Cameron came on the TV and told them everything will be okay and they can trust him. They are not Tories, although they will probably vote Tory because they are repelled by Corbyn and Farage for differing reasons.
Those same sort of quiet suburban voters, largely apolitical, small 'C conservative, community based people, are going be absolutely furious if the UK gets forced by the EU to take a huge load of economic migrants (or any of a number of actions that looks like the country being screwed over by the EU) and are going to blame Dave for lying to them, and most of the newspapers (irrespective of their IN or OUT stand will line up to say the same thing)
They won't though. They won't be furious, and beyond some token moaning, nor will the papers. The myth of the suburban British middle class being pushed beyond the limits of politeness is just that. The reality is that bullying makes you more passive, not more aggressive. If there were a 'limit' we would have reached it long ago.
As long as house prices keep going up, what's not to like? A lot of the politics in this country is dictated by this metric.
Ain't that true and what a load of quicksand it all is. I bought my house for £5 and now it's worth £27 trillion, yes mate good for you, so is everybody else's.
Currently he just seems to be worrying about how to Remain and get Osborne as his successor. History may not be kind to him with those aims.
In some ways the fact that he is apparently unable to see how Osborne is going to repel voters is droves is more worrying than his ability to get sold a pup by the EU.
Backing Osborne because he is better that Corbyn is a dangerous strategy, there is a chance Labour will come to it's senses and select someone electable, there is possibly a larger chance that Corbyn won't make it to the next election on health grounds.
Well done you, I seem to remember you talking about NHS funding, at least you now know where the money's going.
And that "free lunch", could that money be better spent elsewhere?
People generally talk about the lower paid and benefit scroungers when discussing an entitlement culture.
Yes, public sector workers should be worked into the ground - no perks, no incentives, no recognition. That is how they will be motivated to do their best work. (Recruitment crisis - what recruitment crisis?)
Of course if we are talking about private sector managers and directors, nothing is too good for them, remember they are a higher caste and must be catered to lest they leave the country and we are impoverished. Let them eat huge bonuses.
In reality there isn't such a huge cultural divide and there are pockets of wastefulness and efficiency in both sectors. Let's not let right wing monomaniacs drive a wedge between us.
Cameron should be worrying about the legacy is he leaving behind. 1. Is he to be the PM who presented such a poor deal with the EC that the voters rejected him and left the EC? Or 2. Is he to be the PM who kept us in the EC but broke his party apart through his "loading the dice" against the eurosceptics? Currently he just seems to be worrying about how to Remain and get Osborne as his successor. History may not be kind to him with those aims.
It seems to me that How Cameron is viewed on here fits in nicely with personal likes/prejudices I doubt for one second that Cameron is trying to engineer GO into NO 10. I think GO is doing that all by himself..
Why has Cameron made him his deputy then? Judge a man by what he does.
I don't think the overwhelmingly eurosceptic Tory Party will tear "themselves" apart... Though they might tear silly euro-obsessed Cameron, Osborne, Clarke and Hezza (who are actually representing a tiny minority within the party) apart...
Mr. CD13, Cameron's very lucky on immigration. He pledged to cut it and it's at a record high, but the migration crisis and Merkel being a moron means there's an immediate and obvious comparison which has been plastered over the media. On top of that, Cameron's approach to Syrian refugees has been a good deal more sensible than Merkel's.
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
Craven fear? It's that remark which is contemptible. To feed your own prejudice and downright ignorance you will happily see your own country broken up. Indeed you crave for it. Utterly pathetic. Fat chance of a Zane debate with the likes of you around.
Foxinsox. What is Influence? As in 'ooooh - we'll suffer a catastrophic loss of influence'.
The OED offers two definitions: 1. The capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behaviour of someone or something, or the effect itself 2. The power to shape policy or ensure favourable treatment from someone, especially through status, contacts, or wealth
The whole idea is that someone or something else has the real power - and you have a more limited power to try to change their decisions to your own advantage. 'Influence' necessarily implies subordination. Hmmm...
We have gifted the EU / Brussels the real power by virtue of being a member, bound by their socialist ideas to drive forward 'the project'. If the EU decides something that is bad for us - well bad luck. Actually we cannot influence at all - because there is no will or capacity to deviate from 'the project'. As Dave is currently discovering.
We do actually have the choice simply to take back the real power over what rules and laws apply in the UK. We would indeed suffer a total and utter collapse in our influence over EU rule making. But would have replaced it with total and utter control / power over our own law making. We would have negated the subordination.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
Although they won't, I'd like the leave campaign to have a poster/broadcast that implied that by voting to leave the EU we could provoke the Scots into having another referendum and potentially leaving the UK. Two birds, one stone. What's not to like?!
Yup. Independence for England - from Brussels and from Malc. Wahooo!
Scotland isn't malc though, although that is what the snp would like you to believe. The loony CNers in the SNP and in England would like an independent Scotland since they would see it as a way to remove the deterrent.
I think a second Scottish independence referendum off the back of the UK voting to leave the EU would be very interesting. Given the price of oil at the moment I think they'd vote to stay, but it would be interesting to see how the arguments played out.
Mr. Jessop, I hope not. It might be the other way around (if things were rocky he may not have wanted to lose his wife and his job at the same time).
They did seem a good couple, and I'm a bit surprised.
The report I read this morning said they didn't live together, which would be an unusual basis for a marriage.
A very good friend of mine got married, and they kept separate homes as they both worked for different universities / schools a good hundred miles apart. Sadly their marriage did not last for many years.
I never understood why they did not just split the difference and live midway between the two places; neither had strong ties in the areas they were working.
Mr. CD13, Cameron's very lucky on immigration. He pledged to cut it and it's at a record high, but the migration crisis and Merkel being a moron means there's an immediate and obvious comparison which has been plastered over the media. On top of that, Cameron's approach to Syrian refugees has been a good deal more sensible than Merkel's.
I don't mind that he pledge to cut it, so much as he pledge to cut it when doing so was not within his gift. There is no way he could cut immigration to 10's of thousand while we are in the EU, since the nett number arriving from the EU last year was 178,000. Promising to deliver something that is not within your power is basically a lie.
A week ago he told us all that "immigration into Britain is not sustainable" and then proposes to do basically feck all about it, except it might be added increase the number of rejections for lawful visa applications following the process by 18%.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
Spot on. It's a mystery how successive Tory leaders seem incapable of arriving at the sensible and obvious conclusion over EU matters.
The Conservatives seem to be largely sceptical, except at the top. But the top's going to change in the next few years. As I wrote before, this is an opportunity for the Conservatives to have a democratic answer to any internal dispute.
Blair went badly awry on Iraq, both on it being ideological and on the competence issue.
I think you're spot on that Iraq was as much or more about competence as the right/wrong of the matter.
Thing is, Iraq (and Afghanistan, of course) gave rise to that long string of coffins at Wootton Bassett. There won't, I think, be anything so emotive connected with the EU.
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
Craven fear? It's that remark which is contemptible. To feed your own prejudice and downright ignorance you will happily see your own country broken up. Indeed you crave for it. Utterly pathetic. Fat chance of a Zane debate with the likes of you around.
So correct me if I am wrong, all the Nats need to do is to threaten to call a referendum over any issue the feel like and you would fold rather than "see your own country broken up". The EU is the current cause celebre, next year it will be something else you can be sure,
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
Craven fear? It's that remark which is contemptible. To feed your own prejudice and downright ignorance you will happily see your own country broken up. Indeed you crave for it. Utterly pathetic. Fat chance of a Zane debate with the likes of you around.
So correct me if I am wrong, all the Nats need to do is to threaten to call a referendum over any issue the feel like and you would fold rather than "see your own country broken up". The EU is the current cause celebre, next year it will be something else you can be sure,
Of course, the Nats have no power to call a referendum...
A Gallup poll today has Cameron the third most popular wotld leader behind Obama and Merkel, he is particularly popular in North America and ahead of Obama in China though Obama is more popular in the UK. Rouhani and Putin are least popular
The Conservatives seem to be largely sceptical, except at the top. But the top's going to change in the next few years. As I wrote before, this is an opportunity for the Conservatives to have a democratic answer to any internal dispute.
If the membership is given Osborne vs May, as seems entirely possible, its difficult to see how that works out. If they select Osborne it will be the same Euro-friendly corporatist crap that Dave likes, if May it will be a eurosceptic government trying to justify their parties wishy-washy renegotiation and the slew of Euro-idiocy that will follow after the remain vote.
Hague makes an interesting point about fledgling democracies, particular those in Western Balkans. Having travelled in these countries, I think it important that we do work towards them joining the EU, helping to stabilise their democracies.
I'm generally pro-EU, although against the Euro, which has been an economic disaster. However, as far as I can see Hague doesn't take issue with the large numbers of young people who are leaving eastern europe to come to UK or Germany for work. It seems to me these are often the brightest, most energetic of the young in these countries. Where does it leave the countries they come from if there is this level of 'brain drain'?
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
Spot on. It's a mystery how successive Tory leaders seem incapable of arriving at the sensible and obvious conclusion over EU matters.
What could be more sensible and obvious than asking the voters whether they want to be in or out of the EU? Although it was too dumb and obtuse for the Labour and LibDems to grasp....,
Hague's 'article' is pure Foreign Office propaganda. No surprise if you dial back a bit and remember the laughable review of our relations with the EU that the FO put together when Hague was at the Foreign Office.
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
Craven fear? It's that remark which is contemptible. To feed your own prejudice and downright ignorance you will happily see your own country broken up. Indeed you crave for it. Utterly pathetic. Fat chance of a Zane debate with the likes of you around.
So correct me if I am wrong, all the Nats need to do is to threaten to call a referendum over any issue the feel like and you would fold rather than "see your own country broken up". The EU is the current cause celebre, next year it will be something else you can be sure,
Of course, the Nats have no power to call a referendum...
They could call an advisory referendum and cause merry hell politically if there is a strong vote for leave or they could just use it to declare UDI.
The Conservatives seem to be largely sceptical, except at the top. But the top's going to change in the next few years. As I wrote before, this is an opportunity for the Conservatives to have a democratic answer to any internal dispute.
Europhilia in the Conservative party is dying out.
A Gallup poll today has Cameron the third most popular wotld leader behind Obama and Merkel, he is particularly popular in North America and ahead of Obama in China though Obama is more popular in the UK. Rouhani and Putin are least popular
I would be surprised if many Americans or Chinese had the first idea if who he is. It's probably more a reflection of views about the UK. China officially likes us now, while the Yanks have always had a soft spot.
A Gallup poll today has Cameron the third most popular wotld leader behind Obama and Merkel, he is particularly popular in North America and ahead of Obama in China though Obama is more popular in the UK. Rouhani and Putin are least popular
I would be surprised if many Americans or Chinese had the first idea if who he is. It's probably more a reflection of views about the UK. China officially likes us now, while the Yanks have always had a soft spot.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
This is the real problem imo. We need the Conservative Party to remain at least semi-operational until the centre-left pulls itself together (date tbc).
There are people here arguing that a Leave vote would best achieve this. They might be right. I'm sceptical because I think the Tories with swing-voter appeal will be lined up behind Remain. If Leave wins and the next Tory leader is a Leaver they will have unity in the party but a threadbare electoral mandate in 2020 (and the tricky question of how Leave is actually implemented, something that will further excite the right but leave most voters bewildered as to wtf is going on).
There is *some* chance for CorLab in those circumstances.
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
Craven fear? It's that remark which is contemptible. To feed your own prejudice and downright ignorance you will happily see your own country broken up. Indeed you crave for it. Utterly pathetic. Fat chance of a Zane debate with the likes of you around.
So correct me if I am wrong, all the Nats need to do is to threaten to call a referendum over any issue the feel like and you would fold rather than "see your own country broken up". The EU is the current cause celebre, next year it will be something else you can be sure,
Of course, the Nats have no power to call a referendum...
They could call an advisory referendum and cause merry hell politically if there is a strong vote for leave or they could just use it to declare UDI.
Turn out for an "advisory referendum" would be light. Who would spend money on that campaign.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
Hague, Heseltine - all yesterdays men. Add in Cameron and not many "inners" who aren't on the way out.
GO probably the only one - and he might be short of friends soon.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
Spot on. It's a mystery how successive Tory leaders seem incapable of arriving at the sensible and obvious conclusion over EU matters.
What could be more sensible and obvious than asking the voters whether they want to be in or out of the EU? Although it was too dumb and obtuse for the Labour and LibDems to grasp....,
Err...where to begin? Are we really going to offered a clean and simple campaign with no lies and tax-paid propaganda. 10/10 for giving us a referendum. 0/10 for how it is inevitably going to be run, the likely outcome and the decades of unnecessary internecine civil war it will engender. Scotland's experience of the divisiveness these things cause is salutary. Driven largely by unhinged lies from one side. It was not an honest, fact based, debate - it was a hate filled campaign. I think we'll see this again. We'll get the LibDem lies about 3 million jobs being 'dependent upon our remaining in the EU', the 'loss of influence' bullshit and all the rest. I think we all know exactly how its going to play out and what the result is going to be.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
Spot on. It's a mystery how successive Tory leaders seem incapable of arriving at the sensible and obvious conclusion over EU matters.
What could be more sensible and obvious than asking the voters whether they want to be in or out of the EU? Although it was too dumb and obtuse for the Labour and LibDems to grasp....,
Err...where to begin? Are we really going to offered a clean and simple campaign with no lies and tax-paid propaganda. 10/10 for giving us a referendum. 0/10 for how it is inevitably going to be run, the likely outcome and the decades of unnecessary internecine civil war it will engender. Scotland's experience of the divisiveness these things cause is salutary. Driven largely by unhinged lies from one side. It was not an honest, fact based, debate - it was a hate filled campaign. I think we'll see this again. We'll get the LibDem lies about 3 million jobs being 'dependent upon our remaining in the EU', the 'loss of influence' bullshit and all the rest. I think we all know exactly how its going to play out and what the result is going to be.
No different to any other democratic election ?
Think of the lies Miliband spouted in May - Labour still lost.
OUT needs the best campaigners and best leaders.
At the moment OUT looks like Accrington Stanley managed by Pep Guardiola - they need better players out front.
'Europhilia in the Conservative party is dying out.'
Overt Europhilia is now limited to a few superannuated characters. But we still have a more covert kind of EU support among 'court' Tories.
This version wishes to perpetuate the myth that the UK can be 'In Europe but not run by Europe' (remember that?). In reality what it boils down to is senior politicians and civil servants desperately wanting to remain at the 'top table' attending summits and taking selfies etc.
In many ways this latter form of Europhilia is more dishonest than that practised by Heseltine etc. and it is also less honourable as it is mostly about self-importance and self-advancement.
If the reaction on here to William Hague's article is anything to go by, the Tory civil war over Europe is going to get very nasty. He used to be a PB favourite.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
Spot on. It's a mystery how successive Tory leaders seem incapable of arriving at the sensible and obvious conclusion over EU matters.
What could be more sensible and obvious than asking the voters whether they want to be in or out of the EU? Although it was too dumb and obtuse for the Labour and LibDems to grasp....,
Err...where to begin? Are we really going to offered a clean and simple campaign with no lies and tax-paid propaganda. 10/10 for giving us a referendum. 0/10 for how it is inevitably going to be run, the likely outcome and the decades of unnecessary internecine civil war it will engender. Scotland's experience of the divisiveness these things cause is salutary. Driven largely by unhinged lies from one side. It was not an honest, fact based, debate - it was a hate filled campaign. I think we'll see this again. We'll get the LibDem lies about 3 million jobs being 'dependent upon our remaining in the EU', the 'loss of influence' bullshit and all the rest. I think we all know exactly how its going to play out and what the result is going to be.
No different to any other democratic election ?
Think of the lies Miliband spouted in May - Labour still lost.
OUT needs the best campaigners and best leaders.
At the moment OUT looks like Accrington Stanley managed by Pep Guardiola - they need better players out front.
It should give people a slight pause for thought that at the moment, with Farage visible, and piss poor management, that Accrington Stanley is neck-and-neck in the polls. It would suggest even a moderately improved campaign, and locking Farage in a box could leave Remain in big trouble.
As an aside, it's telling there isn't more discussion here about Corbyn's xenophobic comments.
We've priced in the Labour leader supporting Britain's enemies. His security-threatening tendency (do we shoot suicide bombers? Hmm...) may well have percolated through to the general public as well.
If Labour can't shift that, they'll find it hard to win.
The problem for the Conservatives is that some of the more empty-headed amongst them may see that as a green light for civil war because they believe 2020 is sewn up. Even if it were, that would be stockpiling ammunition for Labour in 2025.
Damn those pesky not often very politically aware and easily lied to voters. How would the Scots be feeling today if they had voted YES? No currency, massive loss of business (esp finance) to England, sod all oil revenue, enforced austerity (real austerity), having to apply to rejoin the EU, etc, etc. There'd be riots. Salmond's head on a spike in the Grassmarket. So...I'm 100% in favour of letting voters decide - but also 100% in favour of the death penalty by being fed feet first into a mincer for lying to them over these sort of things.
I think I am probably the only "Labour Leave" regular on PB. Of course, I have some strange bed-fellows on the Leave side, but I just have to go with it for this one issue. I would like as many high-profile Tories as possible to campaign for Leave - not because I will be agreeing with the centre-right/right wing arguments for Leave, but because they will be able to shift a bloc that the Kippers or left leavers can't. On my side of the spectrum, I can't see many high profile Labour figures campaigning for Leave, unless Cameron starts going on about being able to cut workers' rights or other social measures under a reformed EU. If it looks like the EU becomes purely a bosses & bankers club, then perhaps more Labourites will vote to Leave as the only way to be able to enact a Labour manifesto if/when we win an election.
I think I am probably the only "Labour Leave" regular on PB. Of course, I have some strange bed-fellows on the Leave side, but I just have to go with it for this one issue. I would like as many high-profile Tories as possible to campaign for Leave - not because I will be agreeing with the centre-right/right wing arguments for Leave, but because they will be able to shift a bloc that the Kippers or left leavers can't. On my side of the spectrum, I can't see many high profile Labour figures campaigning for Leave, unless Cameron starts going on about being able to cut workers' rights or other social measures under a reformed EU. If it looks like the EU becomes purely a bosses & bankers club, then perhaps more Labourites will vote to Leave as the only way to be able to enact a Labour manifesto if/when we win an election.
It IS a bosses' and bankers' club. The problem is, that in order to oppose them, it is necessary to get into bed with fascists or neo-fascists at the very least.
The only morally justifiable position is abstention.
Remember Mr Conway is the chap who spent over half of a televised "one on one" with the chancellor the day before an Autumn statement asking him repeatedly which class of train ticket he bought.
I think I am probably the only "Labour Leave" regular on PB. Of course, I have some strange bed-fellows on the Leave side, but I just have to go with it for this one issue. I would like as many high-profile Tories as possible to campaign for Leave - not because I will be agreeing with the centre-right/right wing arguments for Leave, but because they will be able to shift a bloc that the Kippers or left leavers can't. On my side of the spectrum, I can't see many high profile Labour figures campaigning for Leave, unless Cameron starts going on about being able to cut workers' rights or other social measures under a reformed EU. If it looks like the EU becomes purely a bosses & bankers club, then perhaps more Labourites will vote to Leave as the only way to be able to enact a Labour manifesto if/when we win an election.
It IS a bosses' and bankers' club. The problem is, that in order to oppose them, it is necessary to get into bed with fascists or neo-fascists at the very least.
The only morally justifiable position is abstention.
You can have the same aims as someone without agreeing with them at all. I mean both the Labour and Tory front benches are at daggers drawn, but they both want the UK to be a vassal of the EU.
Mr. Rentool, will TTIP and the like not feature in lefties' thinking on the EU?
It does, but not enough. Too many people on the left just instinctively think that the EU is 'a good thing' without giving it sufficient thought. Look at TTIP, look at Greece, look at barbed wire fences springing up across the continent as a result of a lack of joined-up response to the migrant crisis, and then say that it is 'a good thing'.
I only get emails inviting me to local CLP meetings - I may have got one about tax credits - but that's it. I've had about four from CCHQ telling me the Tory side of the story re Autumn Statement and a couple of votes.
All in all - I get 20x as many from Millets offering me sale deals.
You are speaking to the already-convinced and repelling the people who remain to be convinced. Sadly, it's the latter group you need to be talking to and attracting.
Nah, he is talking here on PB, there is no "remain to be convinced" here, and not the slightest chance of changing anyone's views. There are just inners and outers now, even the "undecided" got their email from CCHQ last night telling them that Dave is now for IN regardless of the results of his renegotiation.
I'm undecided, although leaning towards leave. I daresay you won't believe me.
Maybe your email is running a bit slow today
I get more emails from Labour than I do the Conservatives.
What do Labour e-mails typically say?
There are fewer now than there were in the run-up to the GE, but most seem to be about individual campaigns. TBF they seem clearer and outwardly more compelling than the Conservative ones.
Emails from both parties get deleted rather rapidly after a quick perusal ...
In December I have had three emails from political parties.
One from David Cameron telling me what a good job he is doing.
One from Jeremy Corbyn asking me what question I want him to ask at PMQs.
One from Tom McNally telling me that Shirley Williams ia about to retire.
Damn those pesky not often very politically aware and easily lied to voters. How would the Scots be feeling today if they had voted YES? No currency, massive loss of business (esp finance) to England, sod all oil revenue, enforced austerity (real austerity), having to apply to rejoin the EU, etc, etc. There'd be riots. Salmond's head on a spike in the Grassmarket. So...I'm 100% in favour of letting voters decide - but also 100% in favour of the death penalty by being fed feet first into a mincer for lying to them over these sort of things.
I've been musing on an off for a while that democracy is wrong in that you vote for the future rather than for the past.
'Kate Hoey thinks the whole thing is a corporatist racket'
There is certainly a very strong element of that, hence the considerable support for the EU in the boardrooms of bigger firms which are either a) the recipients of government largesse b) ultra-bureaucratic organisations which in many ways resemble government departments or c) believe (rightly) the EU is an excellent target for lobbying that will allow them to entrench their market position.
"Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has defended Alex Salmond's account of whether he received legal advice on Scotland's position in the European Union."
I think I am probably the only "Labour Leave" regular on PB. Of course, I have some strange bed-fellows on the Leave side, but I just have to go with it for this one issue. I would like as many high-profile Tories as possible to campaign for Leave - not because I will be agreeing with the centre-right/right wing arguments for Leave, but because they will be able to shift a bloc that the Kippers or left leavers can't. On my side of the spectrum, I can't see many high profile Labour figures campaigning for Leave, unless Cameron starts going on about being able to cut workers' rights or other social measures under a reformed EU. If it looks like the EU becomes purely a bosses & bankers club, then perhaps more Labourites will vote to Leave as the only way to be able to enact a Labour manifesto if/when we win an election.
It IS a bosses' and bankers' club. The problem is, that in order to oppose them, it is necessary to get into bed with fascists or neo-fascists at the very least.
The only morally justifiable position is abstention.
You can have the same aims as someone without agreeing with them at all. I mean both the Labour and Tory front benches are at daggers drawn, but they both want the UK to be a vassal of the EU.
If I agree with you about one thing, others may claim that I agree with you about everything. It's part of how politics works, and this forum copies politicians' worst behaviour.
'Kate Hoey thinks the whole thing is a corporatist racket'
There is certainly a very strong element of that, hence the considerable support for the EU in the boardrooms of bigger firms which are either a) the recipients of government largesse b) ultra-bureaucratic organisations which in many ways resemble government departments or c) believe (rightly) the EU is an excellent target for lobbying that will allow them to entrench their market position.
And perhaps even more crucially, EU bureacracy squeezes out smaller competitors who don't have vast compliance, 'elf n' safety and HR departments who can deal with EU red tape. Big business liking the EU is like someone playing golf at an expensive club - it does cost more but it keeps out the riff raff. Unfortunately for the public, this is directly antithetical to their interests, as most employment comes from SMEs not big companies.
"Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has defended Alex Salmond's account of whether he received legal advice on Scotland's position in the European Union."
Sky misreporting this. Someone will now, in a British court, need to argue that there are in fact less restrictive measures having the same effect on the internal market.
Mr. Rentool, will TTIP and the like not feature in lefties' thinking on the EU?
It does, but not enough. Too many people on the left just instinctively think that the EU is 'a good thing' without giving it sufficient thought. Look at TTIP, look at Greece, look at barbed wire fences springing up across the continent as a result of a lack of joined-up response to the migrant crisis, and then say that it is 'a good thing'.
Got to go...
I'm passionately against TTIP because of its effect on food safety (lower US standards) and on our democracy (ISDS). The so-called economic benefits of TTIP are the usual garbage from some computer model with dubious assumptions. The computer says ...
At the last election, Con, Lab and LD all supported TTIP. Only Greens and UKIP, to their credit, opposed it. So I can't rely on the UK parliament voting against TTIP.
But across Europe may millions have opposed it -particularly in Germany and put immense pressure on MEPs. I am relying on the European Parliament to scupper TTIP against the wishes of the establishment and multinationals.
"Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has defended Alex Salmond's account of whether he received legal advice on Scotland's position in the European Union."
Sky misreporting this. Someone will now, in a British court, need to argue that there are in fact less restrictive measures having the same effect on the internal market.
I'd imagine off licence owners in Carlisle may fund a court appeal to ensure this extra McTax goes ahead...
Looks good for Christie. I have had a late flutter on him, partly to try and cover myself a bit more across the field, but also, I have a feeling he might surprise in NH where indies can vote in primary.
"Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has defended Alex Salmond's account of whether he received legal advice on Scotland's position in the European Union."
Sky misreporting this. Someone will now, in a British court, need to argue that there are in fact less restrictive measures having the same effect on the internal market.
There's the rub. What other alcohol tax or duty options are available to the SG?
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
The crapped pants of the fortnight leading up to 18/09/14 have evidently left their mark.
Sadly, the nats, were too inept to bring home a yes vote. Even against what they loudly proclaim to have been crap opposition. God knows what a trouncing they would have received if they been up against anybody who was half decent.
"Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has defended Alex Salmond's account of whether he received legal advice on Scotland's position in the European Union."
Sky misreporting this. Someone will now, in a British court, need to argue that there are in fact less restrictive measures having the same effect on the internal market.
There's the rub. What other alcohol tax or duty options are available to the SG?
The Hague article in the Telegraph is titled: 'If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm in.'
My own view is: ''If we leave the EU it will break up the UK and destabilise Europe - I'm out.'
A perhaps trite way of pointing out that the 'negatives' many Inners like to parade are in fact features not bugs for many others of us.
I found Hague's craven fear of the Nat reaction especially contemptible.
The crapped pants of the fortnight leading up to 18/09/14 have evidently left their mark.
Sadly, the nats, were too inept to bring home a yes vote. Even against what they loudly proclaim to have been crap opposition. God knows what a trouncing they would have received if they been up against anybody who was half decent.
A little piqued, are we?
Since nobody half decent existed, that's not even a hypotheses.
'Europhilia in the Conservative party is dying out.'
Overt Europhilia is now limited to a few superannuated characters. But we still have a more covert kind of EU support among 'court' Tories.
This version wishes to perpetuate the myth that the UK can be 'In Europe but not run by Europe' (remember that?). In reality what it boils down to is senior politicians and civil servants desperately wanting to remain at the 'top table' attending summits and taking selfies etc.
In many ways this latter form of Europhilia is more dishonest than that practised by Heseltine etc. and it is also less honourable as it is mostly about self-importance and self-advancement.
The polling shows Conservative supporters being fairly equally divided between Leave and Remain.
I'm generally pro-EU, although against the Euro, which has been an economic disaster. However, as far as I can see Hague doesn't take issue with the large numbers of young people who are leaving eastern europe to come to UK or Germany for work. It seems to me these are often the brightest, most energetic of the young in these countries. Where does it leave the countries they come from if there is this level of 'brain drain'?
Which illustrates the failing Hague had to think things through a few steps ahead.
Comments
All in all - I get 20x as many from Millets offering me sale deals.
As long as they give an air of competence, they'll get enough middle of the road voters.
Blair went badly awry on Iraq, both on it being ideological and on the competence issue. Cameron does have an ideological view of the EU (that doesn't mater), but giving pledges on immigration (no ifs, no buts) and failing by a factor of three doesn't look good on competence - it begins to look like an ideological viewpoint
Ozzie has none of the other twos trust or competence ratings, and Jezza is a loon, but Corbyn will step down when he's swung Labour round to an ideological party. If Osborne becomes PM, it will be a triumph for the less unelectable.
We tend to elect the "don't scare the horses" PM unless there's a perceived crisis (as in '79) - and Jezza is a horse-scarer par excellence. There is no crisis, he can't make worse.
EU? It's Cameron's to lose. But he's doing his best.
The loony CNers in the SNP and in England would like an independent Scotland since they would see it as a way to remove the deterrent.
I doubt for one second that Cameron is trying to engineer GO into NO 10. I think GO is doing that all by himself..
Backing Osborne because he is better that Corbyn is a dangerous strategy, there is a chance Labour will come to it's senses and select someone electable, there is possibly a larger chance that Corbyn won't make it to the next election on health grounds.
The OED offers two definitions:
1. The capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behaviour of someone or something, or the effect itself
2. The power to shape policy or ensure favourable treatment from someone, especially through status, contacts, or wealth
The whole idea is that someone or something else has the real power - and you have a more limited power to try to change their decisions to your own advantage. 'Influence' necessarily implies subordination. Hmmm...
We have gifted the EU / Brussels the real power by virtue of being a member, bound by their socialist ideas to drive forward 'the project'. If the EU decides something that is bad for us - well bad luck. Actually we cannot influence at all - because there is no will or capacity to deviate from 'the project'. As Dave is currently discovering.
We do actually have the choice simply to take back the real power over what rules and laws apply in the UK. We would indeed suffer a total and utter collapse in our influence over EU rule making. But would have replaced it with total and utter control / power over our own law making. We would have negated the subordination.
You have to feel sorry for voters. It seems they will soon be facing a full slate of dysfunctional parties. They'll go for the Tories, of course, as they'll never vote for a party led by a man who actively dislikes the UK and hangs out with apologists for terrorism and murder, but it's not much of a choice.
A week ago he told us all that "immigration into Britain is not sustainable" and then proposes to do basically feck all about it, except it might be added increase the number of rejections for lawful visa applications following the process by 18%.
The Conservatives seem to be largely sceptical, except at the top. But the top's going to change in the next few years. As I wrote before, this is an opportunity for the Conservatives to have a democratic answer to any internal dispute.
Thing is, Iraq (and Afghanistan, of course) gave rise to that long string of coffins at Wootton Bassett. There won't, I think, be anything so emotive connected with the EU.
https://twitter.com/Fight4UK/status/679590371865804800
Hague makes an interesting point about fledgling democracies, particular those in Western Balkans. Having travelled in these countries, I think it important that we do work towards them joining the EU, helping to stabilise their democracies.
I'm generally pro-EU, although against the Euro, which has been an economic disaster. However, as far as I can see Hague doesn't take issue with the large numbers of young people who are leaving eastern europe to come to UK or Germany for work. It seems to me these are often the brightest, most energetic of the young in these countries. Where does it leave the countries they come from if there is this level of 'brain drain'?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/23/10-ways-jeremy-corbyn-can-improve-as-labour-leader
That's just a statement of the law.
There are people here arguing that a Leave vote would best achieve this. They might be right. I'm sceptical because I think the Tories with swing-voter appeal will be lined up behind Remain. If Leave wins and the next Tory leader is a Leaver they will have unity in the party but a threadbare electoral mandate in 2020 (and the tricky question of how Leave is actually implemented, something that will further excite the right but leave most voters bewildered as to wtf is going on).
There is *some* chance for CorLab in those circumstances.
GO probably the only one - and he might be short of friends soon.
Think of the lies Miliband spouted in May - Labour still lost.
OUT needs the best campaigners and best leaders.
At the moment OUT looks like Accrington Stanley managed by Pep Guardiola - they need better players out front.
Sky News @SkyNews 1m1 minute ago
The European Courts of Justice says the Scottish parliament cannot introduce a minimum price per unit of alcohol
Overt Europhilia is now limited to a few superannuated characters. But we still have a more covert kind of EU support among 'court' Tories.
This version wishes to perpetuate the myth that the UK can be 'In Europe but not run by Europe' (remember that?). In reality what it boils down to is senior politicians and civil servants desperately wanting to remain at the 'top table' attending summits and taking selfies etc.
In many ways this latter form of Europhilia is more dishonest than that practised by Heseltine etc. and it is also less honourable as it is mostly about self-importance and self-advancement.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2015/dec/22/10-more-things-weve-learnt-about-the-general-election-from-the-cowleykavanagh-book
Point 10 sums up, for me, why Labour lost in 2015:
10 - Miliband once responded to a briefing from Stan Greenberg about Labour’s internal polling by saying: “Do you have to be so negative?”
We've priced in the Labour leader supporting Britain's enemies. His security-threatening tendency (do we shoot suicide bombers? Hmm...) may well have percolated through to the general public as well.
If Labour can't shift that, they'll find it hard to win.
The problem for the Conservatives is that some of the more empty-headed amongst them may see that as a green light for civil war because they believe 2020 is sewn up. Even if it were, that would be stockpiling ammunition for Labour in 2025.
The only morally justifiable position is abstention.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipzSVd9VKw4
Got to go...
One from David Cameron telling me what a good job he is doing.
One from Jeremy Corbyn asking me what question I want him to ask at PMQs.
One from Tom McNally telling me that Shirley Williams ia about to retire.
@NicolaSturgeon: No, it doesn't. It sets out tests national court needs to apply. We think those tests can be passed https://t.co/oC90vuX4Zf
There is certainly a very strong element of that, hence the considerable support for the EU in the boardrooms of bigger firms which are either a) the recipients of government largesse b) ultra-bureaucratic organisations which in many ways resemble government departments or c) believe (rightly) the EU is an excellent target for lobbying that will allow them to entrench their market position.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20042069
"Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has defended Alex Salmond's account of whether he received legal advice on Scotland's position in the European Union."
@kevwodonnell: Salmond to speaker of Iranian Parl: "Scotland’s ruling party has always been against decisions Westerners make against Iran".
Wow.
Merry Christmas....from the Guardian. https://t.co/Ma7BLBZbKj
Sun endorsement worth about 525,000 votes for Labour in 1997 & about 550,000 for Tories in 2010 https://t.co/ffDWHEMyGn
Surely not...
At the last election, Con, Lab and LD all supported TTIP. Only Greens and UKIP, to their credit, opposed it. So I can't rely on the UK parliament voting against TTIP.
But across Europe may millions have opposed it -particularly in Germany and put immense pressure on MEPs. I am relying on the European Parliament to scupper TTIP against the wishes of the establishment and multinationals.
That is why I am anti-TTIP and pro-Remain.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/debate-criteria-217082
Looks good for Christie. I have had a late flutter on him, partly to try and cover myself a bit more across the field, but also, I have a feeling he might surprise in NH where indies can vote in primary.
https://twitter.com/BraidenHT/status/679599900091351040
Since nobody half decent existed, that's not even a hypotheses.
The EUref is not restricted to apoplectic silver surfers!