Weak. If someone can't be bothered to find their NI number, they're probably not that interested in voting.
Besides as has been pointed out already, the number's normally on a payslip. Unless someone is being paid cash in hand, in which case they don't deserve a vote.
(1) Not everyone is employed. It's a bit weird that you're so bubble-ensconced that you aren't aware of that. (2) Of those that are employed, not everyone keeps their payslips in an organised, easily-retrievable way. (3) Universal franchise is not supposed to be dependent on whether you're "that interested" (or indeed whether you are evading tax).
The system falls short of successfully registering everyone who is entitled to vote, and it falls short in a way that works against areas that are more urban, less organised, less educated and less employed. You might find the outcome politically gratifying, but in principle it's not ideal, any more than a requirement that everyone had to register at their nearest large city would be.
With that out of the way, the final tracking polls show both Trump and Rubio going down, Kasich ,Bush and Christie going up.
I wish it were true for Christie as I have a wild bet on him stunning everyone and winning NH. But as far as I can see he was around 10-12% before Xmas and he is now around 5-6% and has been most of the new year.
The biggest problem is that there might be no polling that will be conducted entirely after Saturday's GOP debate, in Iowa most pollsters stopped polling days before the vote, already one of the N.H. trackers has stopped polling yesterday.
I don't know if ARG and CNN will continue polling, with 30% undecideds and no polling to show if there is a late swing coupled with the weather, it's very risky.
The snowstorm might make the polling more accurate, as the undecideds decide not to bother.
(1) Not everyone is employed. It's a bit weird that you're so bubble-ensconced that you aren't aware of that. (2) Of those that are employed, not everyone keeps their payslips in an organised, easily-retrievable way. (3) Universal franchise is not supposed to be dependent on whether you're "that interested" (or indeed whether you are evading tax).
Nick, maybe you don't know this, but anyone on benefits will have their NI number printed on every communication from the DWP. Anyone who's employed gets a payslip weekly or monthly. Students can't get a student loan without knowing their NI number.
It's hard to think of anyone who would have the slightest difficulty finding their NI number in the many months that they have had to register.
You can choose to believe that the UK's interests - if they conflict with the Eurozone - are protected. But they aren't.
So you say. That's a judgement.
My point still remains. Even if you are 100% right, I really cannot see how anyone with a straight face could possibly claim they are better protected if we leave and join the EEA (or agree something similar). Alternatively, if we leave and don't go for an EEA-style deal, there are other problems.
That is the choice we are being asked to make, and is why - in the absence of any explanation from anyone as to how I might have got this wrong - I shall be voting Remain.
It's not a vote of confidence in the EU, or a vote of desperation, or negative, it is simply based on my conclusion that the case for the alternative has not been made. Even more important, I am extremely struck by the fact that the Leave side seem almost completely uninterested in making the case.
I have never said that they are better protected. I think there are very real dangers with Leave, not least the uncertainty.
But it seems to me that you are ignoring the EU's direction of travel in making your decision. You appear to have decided that because Leave have not made a better case than the status quo, better to vote for the status quo.
Fair enough.
Except that the status quo is precisely what is not on offer. If the UK votes to Remain, the EU will embark on every closer political and economic union and the UK will be dragged into that (the political union and the non-euro stuff will affect stuff like justice, home affairs, policing and all sorts of other stuff) and will also be disadvantaged / outvoted by a Eurozone acting only in its own interests.
So the choice for me is between where the EU is headed - and life outside - with all the uncertainties that would involve.
It's not a vote of confidence in the EU, or a vote of desperation, or negative, it is simply based on my conclusion that the case for the alternative has not been made. Even more important, I am extremely struck by the fact that the Leave side seem almost completely uninterested in making the case.
And its Party policy, yes. I can't recall a single criticism of Conservative policy and more specifically of Cameron's actions passing your keyboard. As was said above its got to the point where it is pointless engaging you when we can read everything that you appear to think and believe of the party website.
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
Weak. If someone can't be bothered to find their NI number, they're probably not that interested in voting.
Besides as has been pointed out already, the number's normally on a payslip. Unless someone is being paid cash in hand, in which case they don't deserve a vote.
(1) Not everyone is employed. It's a bit weird that you're so bubble-ensconced that you aren't aware of that. (2) Of those that are employed, not everyone keeps their payslips in an organised, easily-retrievable way. (3) Universal franchise is not supposed to be dependent on whether you're "that interested" (or indeed whether you are evading tax).
The system falls short of successfully registering everyone who is entitled to vote, and it falls short in a way that works against areas that are more urban, less organised, less educated and less employed. You might find the outcome politically gratifying, but in principle it's not ideal, any more than a requirement that everyone had to register at their nearest large city would be.
So I think we're in agreement. Outside the EU/EEA the 85% of our economy that does not go to the EU would be protected against Eurozone hegemony in a way we would not inside the EU. Inside the EU the 15% of our economy that goes to EU will get protection for equal treatment from European courts but can not stop new regulations from Eurozone that is bad in an equal fashion.
If the Leave were arguing that, then that would be coherent. Alternatively, if they were arguing the EEA route, that would also be coherent. What is not coherent is to choose some bits from one and some mutually exclusive bits from the other, and use both as arguments in favour of Leave.
Which us exactly what you have been doing by claiming we would end up with economic damage and no control on migration. You position -not fir the first time - is hypocritical and dishonest.
It's not a vote of confidence in the EU, or a vote of desperation, or negative, it is simply based on my conclusion that the case for the alternative has not been made. Even more important, I am extremely struck by the fact that the Leave side seem almost completely uninterested in making the case.
And its Party policy, yes. I can't recall a single criticism of Conservative policy and more specifically of Cameron's actions passing your keyboard. As was said above its got to the point where it is pointless engaging you when we can read everything that you appear to think and believe of the party website.
Don't be silly. I invariably give my opinion and no-one else's. I happen to agree with Cameron on many things. So what?
@Cyclefree - that's fair enough. Different people, looking at the same facts, can come to different conclusions. I've explained my reasoning in detail (I hope not too tedious detail!).
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
You can choose to believe that the UK's interests - if they conflict with the Eurozone - are protected. But they aren't.
So you say. That's a judgement.
My point still remains. Even if you are 100% right, I really cannot see how anyone with a straight face could possibly claim they are better protected if we leave and join the EEA (or agree something similar). Alternatively, if we leave and don't go for an EEA-style deal, there are other problems.
That is the choice we are being asked to make, and is why - in the absence of any explanation from anyone as to how I might have got this wrong - I shall be voting Remain.
It's not a vote of confidence in the EU, or a vote of desperation, or negative, it is simply based on my conclusion that the case for the alternative has not been made. Even more important, I am extremely struck by the fact that the Leave side seem almost completely uninterested in making the case.
I have never said that they are better protected. I think there are very real dangers with Leave, not least the uncertainty.
But it seems to me that you are ignoring the EU's direction of travel in making your decision. You appear to have decided that because Leave have not made a better case than the status quo, better to vote for the status quo.
Fair enough.
Except that the status quo is precisely what is not on offer. If the UK votes to Remain, the EU will embark on every closer political and economic union and the UK will be dragged into that (the political union and the non-euro stuff will affect stuff like justice, home affairs, policing and all sorts of other stuff) and will also be disadvantaged / outvoted by a Eurozone acting only in its own interests.
So the choice for me is between where the EU is headed - and life outside - with all the uncertainties that would involve.
I think this sums up the disagreement. Like Richard I am inclined to vote for the status quo. I believe we will vote for the status quo and not further integration too for three reasons.
1 The EU has just agreed in Cameron's renegotiation an end to Ever Closer Union for the UK. 2 Further integration requires a new referendum now which will fail. 3 The Eurozone is not however much anyone portrays it an homogenous block. It never will be in my lifetime either.
This is not a repeat of the 1970s referendum where future governments of all parties were to sign up for major further integrated without a referendum.
So far Trump down 2 and 1, Rubio down 1 and 1, Kasich up 1 down 1, Bush 0 and 0, Christie up 1 and 1, over a single tracking day.
Over time the changes since last week are more pronounced, Trump has dropped by 6 and 4, Rubio has dropped 2 and 1 from his peak a few days ago, Kasich is up 3 and 3.
But I caution since opinion polls are usually wrong and the weather is a big factor during the winter.
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
Best film I have seen this year by a distance.
It is a great film. Christian Bale is fantastic. But I wonder if one can make sense of it if one has not read the book? I have, so can't really say.
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
Best film I have seen this year by a distance.
Inside Out is better.
But the best non-animated movie, yes. Vastly superior to The Revenant.
@Cyclefree - that's fair enough. Different people, looking at the same facts, can come to different conclusions. I've explained my reasoning in detail (I hope not too tedious detail!).
The problem is there is only one fact that is going to matter, which is what the ECJ thinks, and we don't know (although given their federalist remit we could guess) what that it. If someone takes an suit to the ECJ about any of our new "concessions" and they strike it down, the rest of the EU is going to row in behind them and look apologetically at us while trying not to snicker too much.
Come on, now. This is meant to be a happy website. Let's not argue about who killed who.
The campaign hasn't even begun yet! lol.
It is the REMAINERS who seem to be wetting themselves the most. I can kind of sympathise.
I dunno. We have one BOOer who has resorted to repeatedly saying people who have the temerity to argue points may have a mental illness.
That's not exactly arguing from a position of strength.
Not at all, I am saying people who say they are undecided yet only ever criticise one sides arguments are being disingenuous... What they are doing is an old PR trick of pretending to be neutral when their mind is made up, as it comes across as more persuasive.
I am never, repeat never, referring to yourself when I say this, so please stop constantly getting on my case as if I am
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
Best film I have seen this year by a distance.
Inside Out is better.
But the best non-animated movie, yes. Vastly superior to The Revenant.
I loved Inside Out. It is ridiculous it was not on the short list for an Oscar. Best film, let alone best animation.
But The Big Short did a brilliant job of demonstrating the insanity of the run up to the crash and making it comprehensible. I am sure that the regulator by the pool was not our @Cyclefree of course but that was a great scene.
So far Trump down 2 and 1, Rubio down 1 and 1, Kasich up 1 down 1, Bush 0 and 0, Christie up 1 and 1, over a single tracking day.
Over time the changes since last week are more pronounced, Trump has dropped by 6 and 4, Rubio has dropped 2 and 1 from his peak a few days ago, Kasich is up 3 and 3.
But I caution since opinion polls are usually wrong and the weather is a big factor during the winter.
I'll stick my neck out and say that I think the NH polls are way out. I just wish I knew which way. But I think generally polls are overstating Trump's true vote level. We'll see in 24 hours.
So far Trump down 2 and 1, Rubio down 1 and 1, Kasich up 1 down 1, Bush 0 and 0, Christie up 1 and 1, over a single tracking day.
Over time the changes since last week are more pronounced, Trump has dropped by 6 and 4, Rubio has dropped 2 and 1 from his peak a few days ago, Kasich is up 3 and 3.
But I caution since opinion polls are usually wrong and the weather is a big factor during the winter.
Who could the snowstorm benefit and who might it hinder ?
@Cyclefree - that's fair enough. Different people, looking at the same facts, can come to different conclusions. I've explained my reasoning in detail (I hope not too tedious detail!).
An average of 14 error means it could be sometimes over 14 so below 20 or over 48 is possible.
The average error isn't 14 at all, there's been a tremendous cherry picking of data there. I'll check what it was over all polls later on this evening.
Which us exactly what you have been doing by claiming we would end up with economic damage and no control on migration. You position -not fir the first time - is hypocritical and dishonest.
No, I said we could end up with economic damage and no control on migration if we go the EEA route, as a result of uncertainty during the transition to EEA membership, and that that would be the worst of both worlds for someone motivated by migration to vote Leave.
My opinion is that economic damage from the transition is very likely, because we'll have two years or more of uncertainty as to the terms under which we'll be in the Single Market. This is hardly a controversial opinion; most informed commentators agree, as you'll see with a few quick Google searches.
With that out of the way, the final tracking polls show both Trump and Rubio going down, Kasich ,Bush and Christie going up.
Why are the other contests not quoted? If we're starting in 1980 then we should have
Dem 1980 (Edward Kennedy took on Carter) Dem 1988 - open contest Dem 1992 - open contest Rep 1992 - Bush had to fight off Pat Buchanan (and nearly didn't) Dem 2000 - open contest Dem 2004 - open contest Rep 2008 - open contest Rep 2012 - open contest
An average of 14 error means it could be sometimes over 14 so below 20 or over 48 is possible.
The average error isn't 14 at all, there's been a tremendous cherry picking of data there. I'll check what it was over all polls later on this evening.
The average error for the top 3 in the 2008 GOP N.H was 2%, in 2012 GOP N.H it was 3.5%. In the 2004 DEM N.H it was 2%.
So far Trump down 2 and 1, Rubio down 1 and 1, Kasich up 1 down 1, Bush 0 and 0, Christie up 1 and 1, over a single tracking day.
Over time the changes since last week are more pronounced, Trump has dropped by 6 and 4, Rubio has dropped 2 and 1 from his peak a few days ago, Kasich is up 3 and 3.
But I caution since opinion polls are usually wrong and the weather is a big factor during the winter.
Who could the snowstorm benefit and who might it hinder ?
That's the big question.
The polls say (I know, the polls ha) Rubio and Bush have concentrated their support among pensioners, old people hate Trump, Kasich is most popular with young people.
Likewise Hillary is very popular among old women, Sanders is popular among young people.
Basically old people vote for the same, young people vote for change.
"Parts of the Northeast could get walloped with more than a foot of snow Monday, and accompanying strong winds could create dangerous road conditions just before New Hampshire residents gear up to cast their primary votes.
Blizzard conditions were expected in parts of New England, with the eastern portion of the region expected to get about 5-8 inches of snow, while a stretch from Boston to Cape Cod could expect up to 12 inches by the time the storm passes on Tuesday, according to Kevin Roth, lead meteorologist for The Weather Channel.
Winds gusting above 40 mph paired with the snow could create whiteout conditions in those parts of New England, Roth said.
New Hampshire, which has its primary Tuesday, will remain under a winter weather advisory through at least Monday night. Snow showers there are expected to end on Tuesday afternoon, according to NBC meteorologist Bill Karins."
What I'm finding really odd about the referendum so far is that for all we outers were told to stay clear of immigration, Dave and the inners seem to want to talk about nothing else. If I were Cameron I wouldn't want to provide my opponents with ammunition to bring up his broken promise on immigration, but maybe he's a genius and this political blackmail will work.
I think this sums up the disagreement. Like Richard I am inclined to vote for the status quo. I believe we will vote for the status quo and not further integration too for three reasons.
1 The EU has just agreed in Cameron's renegotiation an end to Ever Closer Union for the UK. 2 Further integration requires a new referendum now which will fail. 3 The Eurozone is not however much anyone portrays it an homogenous block. It never will be in my lifetime either.
This is not a repeat of the 1970s referendum where future governments of all parties were to sign up for major further integrated without a referendum.
I disagree with you and Richard on this. I think a vote for Remain will be taken by the rest of the EU as a vote for wherever the EU is headed, albeit we might maintain some opt-outs. We will maintain our currency but as much else as possible will be pushed along the integration route and our position outside the Eurozone will be made uncomfortable for us, partly pour encourager les autres and partly because the EU will rightly calculate that at some point there will be a less Eurosceptic government. The EU can read the British political scene as well as the rest of us; they know perfectly well that this charade has only been embarked on because of the UKIP threat and that this threat has turned out to be so much hot air.
Salami slicing works pretty well. There will be lots of little creeping changes and one day we'll look back and see how many changes have been made. And my guess is that the referendum lock will never be used.
I still think Remain is likely to win. But the only chance of making the EU think again, possibly, is if the Leave vote is as large as possible. Not just in Britain's interest but, frankly, in the EU's interests. Somewhere along the way the EU ideal has been horribly twisted into an undemocratic, statist, top down bureaucratic organisation with contempt for the people and a mistaken belief that the wise course of action is to draw up theories first and then impose them on people rather than work with the grain of how people are and what they want.
I feel that I am being pushed into making a choice between democracy and Europe. I wish that were not the choice. But if it is, democracy wins every time. For me, anyway.
So far Trump down 2 and 1, Rubio down 1 and 1, Kasich up 1 down 1, Bush 0 and 0, Christie up 1 and 1, over a single tracking day.
Over time the changes since last week are more pronounced, Trump has dropped by 6 and 4, Rubio has dropped 2 and 1 from his peak a few days ago, Kasich is up 3 and 3.
But I caution since opinion polls are usually wrong and the weather is a big factor during the winter.
Who could the snowstorm benefit and who might it hinder ?
That's the big question.
The polls say (I know, the polls ha) Rubio and Bush have concentrated their support among pensioners, old people hate Trump, Kasich is most popular with young people.
Likewise Hillary is very popular among old women, Sanders is popular among young people.
Basically old people vote for the same, young people vote for change.
Do old people like snow?
I bet half the people voting for Bush don't even realise it is 2016 and think they're voting for his Dad still.
What I'm finding really odd about the referendum so far is that for all we outers were told to stay clear of immigration, Dave and the inners seem to want to talk about nothing else. If I were Cameron I wouldn't want to provide my opponents with ammunition to bring up his broken promise on immigration, but maybe he's a genius and this political blackmail will work.
He's not been punished at the polls for his broken immigration promise so has probably calculated that since immigration is an issue (and terrorism also) he may as well make it his issues and turn them against the Leave campaign, especially as the latter is being so inept.
We have one chance to debate our role in Europe intelligently and we're going to mess it up. Cameron may genuinely believe that the EU is good for Britain but to try and persuade me on the basis that I and mine will be more at risk of being blown up if we leave, when all my life the biggest terrorist risk has been from British citizens or people our benightedly incompetent governments have let in to the country is a low point.
Staying in any sort of relationship out of fear is no basis for a good relationship. It really isn't. Cameron is doing the pro-EU case no good at all.
Come on, now. This is meant to be a happy website. Let's not argue about who killed who.
The campaign hasn't even begun yet! lol.
It is the REMAINERS who seem to be wetting themselves the most. I can kind of sympathise.
I dunno. We have one BOOer who has resorted to repeatedly saying people who have the temerity to argue points may have a mental illness.
That's not exactly arguing from a position of strength.
Not at all, I am saying people who say they are undecided yet only ever criticise one sides arguments are being disingenuous... What they are doing is an old PR trick of pretending to be neutral when their mind is made up, as it comes across as more persuasive.
I am never, repeat never, referring to yourself when I say this, so please stop constantly getting on my case as if I am
Leaving aside your second paragraph, your first paragraph is not true. FPT I gave a reason why I might question leave more strongly than remain: because I'm probably going to vote leave, I want to make sure that I'm doing the right thing. You inspect the product you're going to buy, not the one you are ignoring.
That would change if I was to seriously consider remain. Which I am not, at least at the moment.
Also, there is enough uncertainty in leave (e.g. in our out of EEA) that questioning leave on one part of the issue might seem like the totality is being questioned.
Leave should have strong, robust answers to such questions. In many cases they do not, which is perhaps why you don't like the questions.
Finally, as I said earlier, it might just be you are noticing when people disagree with you more than when they agree with you.
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
Read the book, saw the film and enjoyed both. However, in support of my thesis, there have always been contrarians in any market. Sometimes they win, often they lose. Nowadays there's so much frothing and blather, almost any eventuality will have been predicted by someone - it's a variation on the million monkeys/typewriter/Hamlet saw.
In all honest I wish we weren't having this referendum, now. It's come at the worst time, when even the smartest analyst cannot foresee what is going to happen to the EU, from eurozone governance to migration.
I'm reluctantly voting LEAVE - as of today, who knows tomorrow - but what if I'm wrong? I could damage my daughter's economic prospects. Equally, I could vote REMAIN and my worst fears about the EU come true, and I condemn my daughter (in my minuscule way) to live in a slow-growth country, with increasingly shrivelled prospects.
Cancel the referendum. Let's wait and see what happens to the EU. Have it in five years time. The deal changes nothing anyway, so it will be status quo ante.
Cancel!
Your daughter has a wealthy father. She can live anywhere in the world that pleases her. She must be both proud and grateful that you can provide those options for her.
For all the huffing and puffing on here, think of all the wild and whacky things that have happened in our lifetimes - most of which were not predicted by the experts. From the Cuban Missile Crisis to the fall of the USSR to 9/11 to the '08 crash. Life goes on, sometimes better, sometimes worse. We can't insure against the future - we just have to get on with it!
Except '08 crash was predicted, by a handful of maverick hedge fund types - the Big Short film shows their extraordinary story.
Best film I have seen this year by a distance.
It is a great film. Christian Bale is fantastic. But I wonder if one can make sense of it if one has not read the book? I have, so can't really say.
My daughter loved it, particularly the explanations. She's not particularly financially astute.
Come on, now. This is meant to be a happy website. Let's not argue about who killed who.
The campaign hasn't even begun yet! lol.
It is the REMAINERS who seem to be wetting themselves the most. I can kind of sympathise.
I dunno. We have one BOOer who has resorted to repeatedly saying people who have the temerity to argue points may have a mental illness.
That's not exactly arguing from a position of strength.
Not at all, I am saying people who say they are undecided yet only ever criticise one sides arguments are being disingenuous... What they are doing is an old PR trick of pretending to be neutral when their mind is made up, as it comes across as more persuasive.
I am never, repeat never, referring to yourself when I say this, so please stop constantly getting on my case as if I am
Leaving aside your second paragraph, your first paragraph is not true. FPT I gave a reason why I might question leave more strongly than remain: because I'm probably going to vote leave, I want to make sure that I'm doing the right thing. You inspect the product you're going to buy, not the one you are ignoring.
That would change if I was to seriously consider remain. Which I am not, at least at the moment.
Also, there is enough uncertainty in leave (e.g. in our out of EEA) that questioning leave on one part of the issue might seem like the totality is being questioned.
Leave should have strong, robust answers to such questions. In many cases they do not, which is perhaps why you don't like the questions.
Finally, as I said earlier, it might just be you are noticing when people disagree with you more than when they agree with you.
Trouble is JJ that in all your ranting you missed the basic fact that right back at the beginning of this argument on the previous thread Isam specifically said he wasn't referring to you.
There are two posters on here on particular who continually say they are undecided and then spend every moment they are on here attacking LEAVE and defending Cameron and REMAIN. Whilst almost every other poster including those who have already said they are planning to vote REMAIN hold their heads in their hands at Cameron's stupidity over the renegotiation and over his comments about migration, these few 'undecideds' still defend him and continue to attack every comment made in support of LEAVE.
To repeat, you are not one of those and Isam said at the very start he was not referring to you. You have spent the last 24 hours shouting about a supposed insult to you that was never made.
Any verdicts on Dad's Army yet? I'm not due to see it for another week.
I saw it on Saturday afternoon. I enjoyed it and, it seemed, so did everyone else in the theatre as there was certainly a lot of laughter.
I think all of the main actors, especially Toby Jones, captured the spirit of the original characters to a greater or lesser extent - with the possible exception of Tom Courtenay who, in my opinion, completely underplayed Corporal Jones and I don't think that decision worked for him.
Trouble is JJ that in all your ranting you missed the basic fact that right back at the beginning of this argument on the previous thread Isam specifically said he wasn't referring to you.
There are two posters on here on particular who continually say they are undecided and then spend every moment they are on here attacking LEAVE and defending Cameron and REMAIN. Whilst almost every other poster including those who have already said they are planning to vote REMAIN hold their heads in their hands at Cameron's stupidity over the renegotiation and over his comments about migration, these few 'undecideds' still defend him and continue to attack every comment made in support of LEAVE.
To repeat, you are not one of those and Isam said at the very start he was not referring to you. You have spent the last 24 hours shouting about a supposed insult to you that was never made.
Yes, I know he did. And that was not ranting: it was a reasoned argument about why someone such as myself might query leave more. Which part do you disagree with?
And if he (and others) do not wish to refer to me, they should not use 'undecideds' as a way of putting everyone who is undecided in the same barrel. He and others do it repeatedly, and it's counter-productive. The undecideds are people you should be reaching out to, not stupidly trolling.
And if there are people as you describe, perhaps the best policy would be to ignore them. It should be said that the few remainers on here generally are far more polite (and far less angry) than the leavers, including yourself.
Comments
https://www.gov.uk/lost-national-insurance-number
Next.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_presidential_primary-3350.html
Not sure they show anything very clearly!
It's hard to think of anyone who would have the slightest difficulty finding their NI number in the many months that they have had to register.
But it seems to me that you are ignoring the EU's direction of travel in making your decision. You appear to have decided that because Leave have not made a better case than the status quo, better to vote for the status quo.
Fair enough.
Except that the status quo is precisely what is not on offer. If the UK votes to Remain, the EU will embark on every closer political and economic union and the UK will be dragged into that (the political union and the non-euro stuff will affect stuff like justice, home affairs, policing and all sorts of other stuff) and will also be disadvantaged / outvoted by a Eurozone acting only in its own interests.
So the choice for me is between where the EU is headed - and life outside - with all the uncertainties that would involve.
That's not exactly arguing from a position of strength.
1 The EU has just agreed in Cameron's renegotiation an end to Ever Closer Union for the UK.
2 Further integration requires a new referendum now which will fail.
3 The Eurozone is not however much anyone portrays it an homogenous block. It never will be in my lifetime either.
This is not a repeat of the 1970s referendum where future governments of all parties were to sign up for major further integrated without a referendum.
Over time the changes since last week are more pronounced, Trump has dropped by 6 and 4, Rubio has dropped 2 and 1 from his peak a few days ago, Kasich is up 3 and 3.
But I caution since opinion polls are usually wrong and the weather is a big factor during the winter.
I am never, repeat never, referring to yourself when I say this, so please stop constantly getting on my case as if I am
But The Big Short did a brilliant job of demonstrating the insanity of the run up to the crash and making it comprehensible. I am sure that the regulator by the pool was not our @Cyclefree of course but that was a great scene.
That's the big question.
He's back to normal performance after a good year.
My opinion is that economic damage from the transition is very likely, because we'll have two years or more of uncertainty as to the terms under which we'll be in the Single Market. This is hardly a controversial opinion; most informed commentators agree, as you'll see with a few quick Google searches.
Dem 1980 (Edward Kennedy took on Carter)
Dem 1988 - open contest
Dem 1992 - open contest
Rep 1992 - Bush had to fight off Pat Buchanan (and nearly didn't)
Dem 2000 - open contest
Dem 2004 - open contest
Rep 2008 - open contest
Rep 2012 - open contest
There are more examples missing than quoted!
Ha-ha ..... there speaks a true leftie!
In the 2004 DEM N.H it was 2%.
My 9-year-old daughter thought it was hilarious.
Edited to add: My husband thought the above fact summed up the film.
Likewise Hillary is very popular among old women, Sanders is popular among young people.
Basically old people vote for the same, young people vote for change.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/weather/new-england-braces-blizzard-ahead-new-hampshire-primary-n513541
"Parts of the Northeast could get walloped with more than a foot of snow Monday, and accompanying strong winds could create dangerous road conditions just before New Hampshire residents gear up to cast their primary votes.
Blizzard conditions were expected in parts of New England, with the eastern portion of the region expected to get about 5-8 inches of snow, while a stretch from Boston to Cape Cod could expect up to 12 inches by the time the storm passes on Tuesday, according to Kevin Roth, lead meteorologist for The Weather Channel.
Winds gusting above 40 mph paired with the snow could create whiteout conditions in those parts of New England, Roth said.
New Hampshire, which has its primary Tuesday, will remain under a winter weather advisory through at least Monday night. Snow showers there are expected to end on Tuesday afternoon, according to NBC meteorologist Bill Karins."
Do old people like snow?
Salami slicing works pretty well. There will be lots of little creeping changes and one day we'll look back and see how many changes have been made. And my guess is that the referendum lock will never be used.
I still think Remain is likely to win. But the only chance of making the EU think again, possibly, is if the Leave vote is as large as possible. Not just in Britain's interest but, frankly, in the EU's interests. Somewhere along the way the EU ideal has been horribly twisted into an undemocratic, statist, top down bureaucratic organisation with contempt for the people and a mistaken belief that the wise course of action is to draw up theories first and then impose them on people rather than work with the grain of how people are and what they want.
I feel that I am being pushed into making a choice between democracy and Europe. I wish that were not the choice. But if it is, democracy wins every time. For me, anyway.
We have one chance to debate our role in Europe intelligently and we're going to mess it up. Cameron may genuinely believe that the EU is good for Britain but to try and persuade me on the basis that I and mine will be more at risk of being blown up if we leave, when all my life the biggest terrorist risk has been from British citizens or people our benightedly incompetent governments have let in to the country is a low point.
Staying in any sort of relationship out of fear is no basis for a good relationship. It really isn't. Cameron is doing the pro-EU case no good at all.
That would change if I was to seriously consider remain. Which I am not, at least at the moment.
Also, there is enough uncertainty in leave (e.g. in our out of EEA) that questioning leave on one part of the issue might seem like the totality is being questioned.
Leave should have strong, robust answers to such questions. In many cases they do not, which is perhaps why you don't like the questions.
Finally, as I said earlier, it might just be you are noticing when people disagree with you more than when they agree with you.
There are two posters on here on particular who continually say they are undecided and then spend every moment they are on here attacking LEAVE and defending Cameron and REMAIN. Whilst almost every other poster including those who have already said they are planning to vote REMAIN hold their heads in their hands at Cameron's stupidity over the renegotiation and over his comments about migration, these few 'undecideds' still defend him and continue to attack every comment made in support of LEAVE.
To repeat, you are not one of those and Isam said at the very start he was not referring to you. You have spent the last 24 hours shouting about a supposed insult to you that was never made.
I think all of the main actors, especially Toby Jones, captured the spirit of the original characters to a greater or lesser extent - with the possible exception of Tom Courtenay who, in my opinion, completely underplayed Corporal Jones and I don't think that decision worked for him.
But overall it's a pretty decent film.
And if he (and others) do not wish to refer to me, they should not use 'undecideds' as a way of putting everyone who is undecided in the same barrel. He and others do it repeatedly, and it's counter-productive. The undecideds are people you should be reaching out to, not stupidly trolling.
And if there are people as you describe, perhaps the best policy would be to ignore them. It should be said that the few remainers on here generally are far more polite (and far less angry) than the leavers, including yourself.