James Longton Someone spray paints dead whale with what they think is the Nuclear Disarmament logo. Except it's the Mercedes logo https://t.co/HeQomUBXUk
Moby Dickhead
Talking of which just read a fabulous book - the true story of the whaleship Essex: rammed and sunk by a whale - which inspired Moby Dick
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Yeah, KJT. I was guessing she'd be 100/1. The whole market has very little value in it, backing all the Olympians for a pound each might be the way forward as whoever wins a gold medal will have their odds come in later. Two heptathletes in the top three won't happen, one of them will be in contention and the other nowhere.
James Longton Someone spray paints dead whale with what they think is the Nuclear Disarmament logo. Except it's the Mercedes logo https://t.co/HeQomUBXUk
Moby Dickhead
Talking of which just read a fabulous book - the true story of the whaleship Essex: rammed and sunk by a whale - which inspired Moby Dick
Looking at his record he's been on both sides of most issues over the years, so it's hard to tell just how 'conservative' or not he genuinely is.
The right winger is not Trump, but Cruz.
In many ways Trump is a moderate, with a few populist views. He's also deeply cynical: he knows that he cannot force Mexico to pay for a wall, but he knows that if he promises it, it'll keep him in the headline. He knows he cannot prevent *all* Muslims from entering the US, but he knows that by proposing it, it will keep him in the headlines. He knows that he can't - by Presidential edict - force Apple to build factories in the US and move iPhone production there. (Hopefully, he realises that it is Foxconn/Hon Hai that assembles them, but that's another story.) Again: he promises the impossible, knowing that that is what keeps in the headlight, and denudes the other candidates of airtime.
He is a fabulous and clever self-publicist, who would probably be a surprisingly successful President. But he would also - as much as Obama - endlessly disappoint his supporters. Muslims still able to enter the US... Mexicans not having stumped up for the fall... etc.
I also suspect Bloomberg would not be a great debater. He's a fabulous manager, and a fabulous technocrat. But he's not a bruiser. Trump could well monster him in a debate, as he's monstered everyone else.
But I do think a Bloomberg campaign would be the best funded in US Presidential history. Trump scares traditional pro-business Republican donors. Because for most of them, protectionism is both ethically abhorrent and economically suicidal. They will not contribute to Sanders, and they are sceptical of Hillary. Bloomberg is their ideal candidate.
My source tells me Bloomberg is currently doing the rounds of governors, ex-Vice Presidents and the like, and is looking to collect 100 serious endorsements - split between Democrats and Republicans - for launch. This would be combined with the endorsement of some of the richest and most sucessful people in the US (Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, the Google boys???).
We shall see. I think those that dismiss him before he spends many billions on a campaign are being short-sighted.
What is his answer to Trump or Sanders asking "do you want a Wall St insider telling you who to vote for?"
Hillary Clinton is the ultimate Wall Street insider.
I agree, she is. But her identity is one of being the "womens issues" candidate.
Trump will merely attack Bloomberg as being the "GOP elite Wall st insider" and make that his identity.
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Yeah, KJT. I was guessing she'd be 100/1. The whole market has very little value in it, backing all the Olympians for a pound each might be the way forward as whoever wins a gold medal will have their odds come in later. Two heptathletes in the top three won't happen, one of them will be in contention and the other nowhere.
Lewis Hamilton, Mo Farah and Chris Froome look like free money for the bookies. They never win it, no matter what they achieve.
Wayne Rooney looks like another awful punt on a bad market.
*Well Lewis won it once, but with F1's TV coverage gutted not again I expect.
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Yeah, KJT. I was guessing she'd be 100/1. The whole market has very little value in it, backing all the Olympians for a pound each might be the way forward as whoever wins a gold medal will have their odds come in later. Two heptathletes in the top three won't happen, one of them will be in contention and the other nowhere.
Lewis Hamilton, Mo Farah and Chris Froome look like free money for the bookies. They never win it, no matter what they achieve.
*Well Lewis won it once, but with F1's TV coverage gutted not again I expect.
Mo Farah not even getting top 3 in 2012 left me very glad I did not bet.
Compare the Jim Murphy statement at the bottom of that Wiki page to Jez.
Murphy on Gibraltar:
"The UK Government will never — "never" is a seldom-used word in politics — enter into an agreement on sovereignty without the agreement of the Government of Gibraltar and their people. In fact, we will never even enter into a process without that agreement. The word "never" sends a substantial and clear commitment and has been used for a purpose. We have delivered that message with confidence to the peoples and the Governments of Gibraltar and Spain. It is a sign of the maturity of our relationship now that that is accepted as the UK's position."
''I'm not at all concerned about Trump winning. Obama is a terrible teleprompter empty suit.''
Donald Trump is popular because he dares to offer the American people things they might want, net of any morality.
How can a giant wall be stupid or immoral if American people want it? How can banning muslims be 'impossible' if many Americans think its a good idea?
For Trump, there's no such thing as a bad idea, if enough people will vote for it.
How can banning muslims be 'impossible' if many Americans think its a good idea?
Because it's unconstitutional, as I said earlier. You can't discriminate on grounds of religion.
8 U.S.C. § 1182(f)
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
Please read my post before replying, as otherwise it wastes both our time. I didn't say it was illegal, I said it was unconstitutional.
Why are non-citizens afforded the protections of the US Constitution?
If you're in the US legally you're entitled to the protections of it. That's why Guantanamo exists.
Sure, but if he's not letting them in in the first place
After all the 13th amendment didn't make slavery ex-US unconstitutional
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Yeah, KJT. I was guessing she'd be 100/1. The whole market has very little value in it, backing all the Olympians for a pound each might be the way forward as whoever wins a gold medal will have their odds come in later. Two heptathletes in the top three won't happen, one of them will be in contention and the other nowhere.
Lewis Hamilton, Mo Farah and Chris Froome look like free money for the bookies. They never win it, no matter what they achieve.
Wayne Rooney looks like another awful punt on a bad market.
*Well Lewis won it once, but with F1's TV coverage gutted not again I expect.
If Farah does the 'double' 5k and 10k gold again he really does deserve to win, but he has too many negatives to win the public vote. Rooney won't be nominated unless he scores a hat-trick in the cup final or England win the Euros - the nominations are by committee now after the Giggs debacle a few years ago.
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Yeah, KJT. I was guessing she'd be 100/1. The whole market has very little value in it, backing all the Olympians for a pound each might be the way forward as whoever wins a gold medal will have their odds come in later. Two heptathletes in the top three won't happen, one of them will be in contention and the other nowhere.
Lewis Hamilton, Mo Farah and Chris Froome look like free money for the bookies. They never win it, no matter what they achieve.
Wayne Rooney looks like another awful punt on a bad market.
*Well Lewis won it once, but with F1's TV coverage gutted not again I expect.
If Farah does the 'double' 5k and 10k gold again he really does deserve to win, but he has too many negatives to win the public vote. Rooney won't be nominated unless he scores a hat-trick in the cup final or England win the Euros - the nominations are by committee now after the Giggs debacle a few years ago.
Perhaps just not seen as properly British, like Chris Froome ?
Those are slightly wrong as they rounded up the CDU share from 32.5% to 33%. This is the first time in years the CDU/CSU lead has dipped under 10 points and it is clear they are losing support to AfD rather than to the FDP. CDU/CSU are down 9 points since the election, FDP up 1 and AfD up 8. I don't know what the internal churn looks like though and if this is a case of AfD mirroring UKIP and picking up a relatively equal amount of support from left and right, but it doesn't look like it.
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Yeah, KJT. I was guessing she'd be 100/1. The whole market has very little value in it, backing all the Olympians for a pound each might be the way forward as whoever wins a gold medal will have their odds come in later. Two heptathletes in the top three won't happen, one of them will be in contention and the other nowhere.
Lewis Hamilton, Mo Farah and Chris Froome look like free money for the bookies. They never win it, no matter what they achieve.
Wayne Rooney looks like another awful punt on a bad market.
*Well Lewis won it once, but with F1's TV coverage gutted not again I expect.
If Farah does the 'double' 5k and 10k gold again he really does deserve to win, but he has too many negatives to win the public vote. Rooney won't be nominated unless he scores a hat-trick in the cup final or England win the Euros - the nominations are by committee now after the Giggs debacle a few years ago.
Perhaps just not seen as properly British, like Chris Froome ?
Probably too many question marks in the minds of the public. Same with Froome. Might well be unmerited and unfair but with the doping problems both sports have had, you could understand the public exercising caution.
Those are slightly wrong as they rounded up the CDU share from 32.5% to 33%. This is the first time in years the CDU/CSU lead has dipped under 10 points and it is clear they are losing support to AfD rather than to the FDP. CDU/CSU are down 9 points since the election, FDP up 1 and AfD up 8. I don't know what the internal churn looks like though and if this is a case of AfD mirroring UKIP and picking up a relatively equal amount of support from left and right, but it doesn't look like it.
Yes, it's new. Caution needed, though, as it's again INSA, who for some reason always show the CDU lower and AfD higher than every other polling institute. Everyone else has CDU at 37-38 and AfD at 10ish:
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Those are slightly wrong as they rounded up the CDU share from 32.5% to 33%. This is the first time in years the CDU/CSU lead has dipped under 10 points and it is clear they are losing support to AfD rather than to the FDP. CDU/CSU are down 9 points since the election, FDP up 1 and AfD up 8. I don't know what the internal churn looks like though and if this is a case of AfD mirroring UKIP and picking up a relatively equal amount of support from left and right, but it doesn't look like it.
Yes, it's new. Caution needed, though, as it's again INSA, who for some reason always show the CDU lower and AfD higher than every other polling institute. Everyone else has CDU at 37-38 and AfD at 10ish:
Even Emnid who seem to be good for the CDU have them down from a recent high of 39 points to 36 points and they have AfD on 10 points, their highest rating with the firm. In fact the only polls with AfD below 10 points are old. There has been a definite shift in Germany towards AfD and away from the CDU.
The government won't change in 2017 though, it still seems odds-on that there will be another grand coalition, I don't see any chance that the CDU/CSU+SPD combined score will be under 45 points, it will be less stable than today, but there is no way that the CDU will want to legitimise AfD by going into coalition with them.
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
Hmmm... is that really what the poll asked? If so, I'd hazard a guess that a large proportion of the 29% who backed 'I'm in favour of non-nuclear Trident submarines' didn't know what it meant. Submarines which aren't nuclear-powered, perhaps? It's a very silly wording.
It's certainly very hard to believe that any sentient being would knowingly support Corbyn's 'policy'.
Those are slightly wrong as they rounded up the CDU share from 32.5% to 33%. This is the first time in years the CDU/CSU lead has dipped under 10 points and it is clear they are losing support to AfD rather than to the FDP. CDU/CSU are down 9 points since the election, FDP up 1 and AfD up 8. I don't know what the internal churn looks like though and if this is a case of AfD mirroring UKIP and picking up a relatively equal amount of support from left and right, but it doesn't look like it.
Yes, it's new. Caution needed, though, as it's again INSA, who for some reason always show the CDU lower and AfD higher than every other polling institute. Everyone else has CDU at 37-38 and AfD at 10ish:
Even Emnid who seem to be good for the CDU have them down from a recent high of 39 points to 36 points and they have AfD on 10 points, their highest rating with the firm. In fact the only polls with AfD below 10 points are old. There has been a definite shift in Germany towards AfD and away from the CDU.
The government won't change in 2017 though, it still seems odds-on that there will be another grand coalition, I don't see any chance that the CDU/CSU+SPD combined score will be under 45 points, it will be less stable than today, but there is no way that the CDU will want to legitimise AfD by going into coalition with them.
Yes a German Tory/Lab coalition leaving UKIP outside. Previously it was a Tory/Lib coalition. Only the names have been changed .... ;-)
One of the many interesting points from #EUWarGames is how royally screwed the Irish would be by Brexit. A Scottish independence referendum would be a choice for Scots between being as screwed as the Irish in the EU or sticking with the rest of the UK. It might be the ultimate test of heart and head.
As a fan of counter-factual histories, let me pose a scenario: what if last year’s Labour leadership election had occurred while the party was still in government? Suppose Prime Minister Miliband (take your pick) had decided, while in Number 10, to change the election rules to give every party member, plus three-quid “supporters”, an equal say in who should succeed him. Then, tragically, a piano which had been only recently used by the Chancellor Ed Balls on which to practice suddenly and mysteriously falls from the window of Number 11 Downing Street while Ed (or David) is walking underneath and – hey presto! – we have a leadership election. Not just for the leader of the Labour Party, you understand, but for the post of Prime Minister.
In living memory, no Prime Minister who has ascended to that position while his party is in government has been chosen exclusively by the rank and file members. This hellish alternative reality would be the very first where members of the governing party’s MPs would have no more say than their constituency party members, other than that crucial right to nominate.
A few (4?) of the US Ohio class submarines were converted to carry conventional weapons after the Berlin wall fell. But they still have 14-odd Ohio nuclear-delivering SSBN submarines, so it's a different matter.
Besides, wasn't Corbyn's wizard wheeze to build new submarines to deliver nukes, but only to keep the know-how on how to build the warheads? (and what about the missiles?)
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
Can you think of a more stupid idea ever floated by the leader of a major party than "subs but not nukes?" I really can't. I expect you're right that most people don't get the implications, don't realise that the submarines in question are designed for a specialised role and so forth. But Corbyn does, doesn't he?
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
How does that work exactly? What will boats actually do?
Tootle around ineffectively until a Conservative government returns.
I'm surprised Corbyn even considered the option (though perhaps he hasn't considered what it means). Keeping the subs without the missiles makes the chance of a renewed deterrent far more likely.
''One of the many interesting points from #EUWarGames is how royally screwed the Irish would be by Brexit. ''
You would have thought, if that's the case, the Irish would have moved heaven and earth to make sure Britain was never isolated in Europe. That we were never trounced twenty odd to one. That they would have been on our side almost every time.
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
Hmmm... is that really what the poll asked? If so, I'd hazard a guess that a large proportion of the 29% who backed 'I'm in favour of non-nuclear Trident submarines' didn't know what it meant. Submarines which aren't nuclear-powered, perhaps? It's a very silly wording.
It's certainly very hard to believe that any sentient being would knowingly support Corbyn's 'policy'.
It's a stupid question really. I expect the question would be much lower if it was phrased as "nuclear subs without nuclear missiles".
The whole debate around Trident has been misrepresented by the press, the government are not renewing the Trident Mk.II missile system or buying any new missiles from the US. We are building new submarines to replace the Vanguard class ones that will be capable of carrying and firing the Trident missile. I think if we asked 100 people what they thought the Trident renewal debate was about I would guess more than 75 would say we are buying new missiles to replace our current stock or in addition to our current stock.
@PippaCrerar: Funny how Ken's piece on London needing to vote fr Jeremy Corbyn "for a better city" doesn't mention Sadiq Khan ONCE https://t.co/2DAvoRXwUO
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
Hmmm... is that really what the poll asked? If so, I'd hazard a guess that a large proportion of the 29% who backed 'I'm in favour of non-nuclear Trident submarines' didn't know what it meant. Submarines which aren't nuclear-powered, perhaps? It's a very silly wording.
It's certainly very hard to believe that any sentient being would knowingly support Corbyn's 'policy'.
It's a stupid question really. I expect the question would be much lower if it was phrased as "nuclear subs without nuclear missiles".
Quite a few people don't realise that Trident is Britain's ONLY nuclear deterrent. They think we have silos at Fylingdales or somewhere.
One of the many interesting points from #EUWarGames is how royally screwed the Irish would be by Brexit. A Scottish independence referendum would be a choice for Scots between being as screwed as the Irish in the EU or sticking with the rest of the UK. It might be the ultimate test of heart and head.
Ireland might go for "out the EU, in the Euro" given that support for the currency is 85-15 there
Grr. Looked at the SPOTY betting following the earlier conversation, with the intention of putting a few quid on an almost unknown, only to find that not only is she clearly not almost unknown, but she's been installed as the third favourite!
Remember the punters who got 50/1 for the unknown Russian athlete Tatyana Dorovskikh in the 1991 World Championships -- before the bookies realised she was the Olympic gold-medallist who'd just got married.
Those are slightly wrong as they rounded up the CDU share from 32.5% to 33%. This is the first time in years the CDU/CSU lead has dipped under 10 points and it is clear they are losing support to AfD rather than to the FDP. CDU/CSU are down 9 points since the election, FDP up 1 and AfD up 8. I don't know what the internal churn looks like though and if this is a case of AfD mirroring UKIP and picking up a relatively equal amount of support from left and right, but it doesn't look like it.
Yes, it's new. Caution needed, though, as it's again INSA, who for some reason always show the CDU lower and AfD higher than every other polling institute. Everyone else has CDU at 37-38 and AfD at 10ish:
Even Emnid who seem to be good for the CDU have them down from a recent high of 39 points to 36 points and they have AfD on 10 points, their highest rating with the firm. In fact the only polls with AfD below 10 points are old. There has been a definite shift in Germany towards AfD and away from the CDU.
The government won't change in 2017 though, it still seems odds-on that there will be another grand coalition, I don't see any chance that the CDU/CSU+SPD combined score will be under 45 points, it will be less stable than today, but there is no way that the CDU will want to legitimise AfD by going into coalition with them.
Yes a German Tory/Lab coalition leaving UKIP outside. Previously it was a Tory/Lib coalition. Only the names have been changed .... ;-)
While there's not much love lost between the leaders of the Conservative Party and UKIP, almost certainly the two parties would either form a coalition, or a supply and confidence arrangement, if we had PR and there were a similar result. Outside wartime, I can't imagine any form of coalition between Conservatives and Labour.
FWIW I see support for Trident is down to 51%. 29% like Corbyn's "subs but not nukes" idea and 20% want to scrap Trident altogether. Caution: there is usually a "pick the middle option" bias at work in any poll with 3 opinions. It confirms the impression that opinion on the issue isn't now especially entrenched - a lot of people would struggle to say what Trident is (the subs? the nukes? both?) and it's not a typical breakfast table issue. The downside is that people who don't feel that strongly also won't want it to dominate Labour debate.
Hmmm... is that really what the poll asked? If so, I'd hazard a guess that a large proportion of the 29% who backed 'I'm in favour of non-nuclear Trident submarines' didn't know what it meant. Submarines which aren't nuclear-powered, perhaps? It's a very silly wording.
It's certainly very hard to believe that any sentient being would knowingly support Corbyn's 'policy'.
"I am in favour of non-nuclear Trident Submarines" Is that not saying that they are in favour of submarines that can carry the Trident missiles as long as they are not nuclear powered. Diesel-Electric Trident Submarines would be OK.
The whole article and the way it is being presented is a total nonsense and just demonstrates the level of ignorance that there is, even amongst those who ought to know better.
One of the many interesting points from #EUWarGames is how royally screwed the Irish would be by Brexit. A Scottish independence referendum would be a choice for Scots between being as screwed as the Irish in the EU or sticking with the rest of the UK. It might be the ultimate test of heart and head.
Ireland might go for "out the EU, in the Euro" given that support for the currency is 85-15 there
Unilateral use of the Euro? Given that the UK would probably end up standing behind Irish (and Scottish) banks if they ever went bankrupt to limit any contagion it could be a reasonable option for Ireland. Not sure how the Europeans would feel about it though. They might not be able to boss us around if we left and started negotiating a free trade deal but Ireland would not be looked on as kindly as we would given how much they have profited from being in the EU and their "having their cake and eating it solution" if they tried to stay in the Eurozone but left the EU.
The whole debate around Trident has been misrepresented by the press, the government are not renewing the Trident Mk.II missile system or buying any new missiles from the US. We are building new submarines to replace the Vanguard class ones that will be capable of carrying and firing the Trident missile. I think if we asked 100 people what they thought the Trident renewal debate was about I would guess more than 75 would say we are buying new missiles to replace our current stock or in addition to our current stock.
All of which makes the extreme cost claims by opponents look a bit silly. We are upgrading and extending the life of the missiles.
"The government is planning to renew the Trident submarine nuclear missile deterrent, while Jeremy Corbyn has suggested the possibility of retaining the Trident submarines without nuclear weapons. Are you in favour of the renewal of fully nuclear Trident missile systems, retaining the Trident submarines without nuclear weapons, or do you oppose retaining any form of Trident submarines?
Comments
Germany, INSA poll:
CDU/CSU-EPP: 33%
█████████████████████████
SPD-S&D: 23%
█████████████████▌
AfD-ECR: 13%
██████████
GRÜNE-G/EFA: 10%
███████▌
LINKE-LEFT: 9% ↓
███████
FDP-ALDE: 6% ↓
████▌
https://www.nojam.com/post/473
http://www.amazon.co.uk/In-Heart-Sea-Story-Inspired/dp/0006531202
Falklands and Gibraltar vote = British patriotism.
Trump will merely attack Bloomberg as being the "GOP elite Wall st insider" and make that his identity.
Wayne Rooney looks like another awful punt on a bad market.
*Well Lewis won it once, but with F1's TV coverage gutted not again I expect.
Murphy on Gibraltar:
"The UK Government will never — "never" is a seldom-used word in politics — enter into an agreement on sovereignty without the agreement of the Government of Gibraltar and their people. In fact, we will never even enter into a process without that agreement. The word "never" sends a substantial and clear commitment and has been used for a purpose. We have delivered that message with confidence to the peoples and the Governments of Gibraltar and Spain. It is a sign of the maturity of our relationship now that that is accepted as the UK's position."
After all the 13th amendment didn't make slavery ex-US unconstitutional
How Thatcher responded when Parkinson told her his secretary was pregnant. (via @Torcuil ) https://t.co/xjEJ8RB7kl https://t.co/IYf77zRVOA
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
The government won't change in 2017 though, it still seems odds-on that there will be another grand coalition, I don't see any chance that the CDU/CSU+SPD combined score will be under 45 points, it will be less stable than today, but there is no way that the CDU will want to legitimise AfD by going into coalition with them.
One can't help a wry smile at the Republic's attitude to Brexit.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/trident-majority-of-britons-back-keeping-nuclear-weapons-programme-poll-shows-a6831376.html
How does that work exactly? What will boats actually do?
You realise that even without missiles, they can't carry out the same missions as the Astute Class Hunter/Killers.
It's certainly very hard to believe that any sentient being would knowingly support Corbyn's 'policy'.
Previously it was a Tory/Lib coalition.
Only the names have been changed .... ;-)
Besides, wasn't Corbyn's wizard wheeze to build new submarines to deliver nukes, but only to keep the know-how on how to build the warheads? (and what about the missiles?)
I'm surprised Corbyn even considered the option (though perhaps he hasn't considered what it means). Keeping the subs without the missiles makes the chance of a renewed deterrent far more likely.
You would have thought, if that's the case, the Irish would have moved heaven and earth to make sure Britain was never isolated in Europe. That we were never trounced twenty odd to one. That they would have been on our side almost every time.
But they weren't.
As someone who isn't massively in favour of nuclear weapons, his option looks appalling to me.
The whole article and the way it is being presented is a total nonsense and just demonstrates the level of ignorance that there is, even amongst those who ought to know better.
"The government is planning to renew the Trident submarine nuclear missile deterrent, while Jeremy Corbyn has suggested the possibility of retaining the Trident submarines without nuclear weapons. Are you in favour of the renewal of fully nuclear Trident missile systems, retaining the Trident submarines without nuclear weapons, or do you oppose retaining any form of Trident submarines?