Thanks. Had a useful summary of potential BREXIT scenarios:
Brexit scenarios
It is often assumed that in the event of Brexit, the UK could choose to be like Norway, Switzerland or Turkey; in Europe but not in the EU. However, these countries have never been in the EU - there is no historical precedent for a country leaving.
European Economic Area The Norway option. The EEA is a free trade area comprising the EU, Norway, Lichtenstein and Iceland. Pros: Direct contribution to the EU would fall by around 17%. Cons: UK would still be subject to EU regulations but would lose its seat at the negotiating table.
European Free Trade Association The Switzerland option. As above but EFTA also includes Switzerland. Pros: not subject to EU regulations, budget contribution falls by c.60%. Cons: would need to negotiate bilateral agreements to access the single market in specific sectors.
Customs union The Turkey option. Pros: retain some benefits of membership, mostly with respect to trade in goods. Cons: outside the single market, with a very severe impact on services sector.
There are many other options – the UK could set up its own free trade agreements with the EU and other nations, or simply rely on the World Trade Organisation’s ‘most favoured nation’ status, under which it would be free to set its own terms of trade.
Have any of the LEAVE campaigns proposed a particular version?
I hope so. As Confucius said "For a man with no destination no wind is favourable"
I don't understand Gove's intervention today, he is not a lawyer let alone an international treaty law expert. I'm of the opinion that Dave's agreement isn't as legally binding as he thinks and the EC will just throw it in the bin (other than the bits they like such as taking back our EMU regulation opt-out) after a Remain vote. The government will take it to court and the political ECJ will vote in the EC's favour. If he wants to argue that the EC/EU are not trustworthy then that's fine, but pretending to be a legal expert is a poor idea.
He may well have talked to a lawyer or two before he came on, possibly even one wrote him a brief
Pippa Creaer Not quite Zac's £10 million in 5 years but Sadiq Khan has published his tax return - took home £300k over same time. https://t.co/nl0ZDaxSMw
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
Actually alot of those events are Heidi out and about. But for sure Cruz is trying to make sure of his home state.
Being seen to make so much effort in your home state and then losing it would be terminal I would have thought. At least Ed Balls had the excuse of spending most of his time campaigning for other people.
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
Actually alot of those events are Heidi out and about. But for sure Cruz is trying to make sure of his home state.
Being seen to make so much effort in your home state and then losing it would be terminal I would have thought. At least Ed Balls had the excuse of spending most of his time campaigning for other people.
I don't understand Gove's intervention today, he is not a lawyer let alone an international treaty law expert. I'm of the opinion that Dave's agreement isn't as legally binding as he thinks and the EC will just throw it in the bin (other than the bits they like such as taking back our EMU regulation opt-out) after a Remain vote. The government will take it to court and the political ECJ will vote in the EC's favour. If he wants to argue that the EC/EU are not trustworthy then that's fine, but pretending to be a legal expert is a poor idea.
He may well have talked to a lawyer or two before he came on, possibly even one wrote him a brief
It doesn't seem like it given the raft of legal opinion that has come out against his intervention.
The other problem is that he has ended up looking foolish when he could have made the very real point about how dangerous the ECJ is to UK intentions and the rule of law.
Can this site's many polling experts clarify a few things about this latest ComRes poll please? It lists 1,000 weighted and unweighted respondents. For the key 65+ age group, the unweighted 254 is changed with weighting to 222 whereas in the much less likely to vote group of 18-25 the unweighted number rises from 86 to 114 with weighting.
Qn1: Is this a fair way to weight when the number of voters that will actually vote in the of 65+ age range is many times that in the 18-25?
Qn2: In the ratings for Certainty to Vote ( 9 and 10) the 18-25 certainty is 63% and the 65+ is 76%. This again seems to be out of line with the known reality on which types of voters, by age, will actually vote. Is it?
Qn3 The certainty to vote (10 rating) has Conservative voters with the 10 rating as less likely to vote than every party except the Greens...... Table 2/2 Shurely inaccurate?
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
Actually alot of those events are Heidi out and about. But for sure Cruz is trying to make sure of his home state.
Being seen to make so much effort in your home state and then losing it would be terminal I would have thought. At least Ed Balls had the excuse of spending most of his time campaigning for other people.
20,000 fewer voters in Edinburgh; 18,000 in Glasgow.
Gotta be post Sindy ref decoupling..
Other than laziness, is there a reason for not re registering after Indy ref?
Fear of Poll Tax 2 ?
The Conservatives should start talking about introducing a poll tax again so that potential Labour supporters will avoid registering to vote and being liable for poll tax.
(Assuming that Labour supporters are more likely to avoid tax at present by having little declared income but would be caught by a poll tax if they register)
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
Actually alot of those events are Heidi out and about. But for sure Cruz is trying to make sure of his home state.
Being seen to make so much effort in your home state and then losing it would be terminal I would have thought. At least Ed Balls had the excuse of spending most of his time campaigning for other people.
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
Actually alot of those events are Heidi out and about. But for sure Cruz is trying to make sure of his home state.
Being seen to make so much effort in your home state and then losing it would be terminal I would have thought. At least Ed Balls had the excuse of spending most of his time campaigning for other people.
Joshua Rozenberg Here’s a very detailed academic view of what’s binding in the EU deal: https://t.co/T8tjb5GLdB Thanks to @ObiterJ for alerting me to it.
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
If Trump has any sense, he'll hold it to the one rally in Texas.
Bear in mind Texas is already voting. The last thing Trump wants to do is actually win Texas. His best result is to get 30% or some such there with Cruz on ~ 35.
I don't know what it would take to get Cruz to pull out anyway. If he falls, and Rubio starts doing well enough to win the odd state, Cruz will want to stay in for leverage at the presumed convention. What bauble could Rubio plausibly promise him?
The Daily Mail has lost all pretense to provide a sensible narrative of the referendum debate and arguably are more extreme in their hatred of those who support remain than even the daily express. For those of us who are seeking a persuasive case to leave it is just a turn off and it would be interesting if the Daily Mail will see a reduction in it's sales until post the referendum. I would cancel it and read it on line but my wife loves the puzzles so it will still be delivered but left unread by myself
Agree with you on puzzles. Yes if you just read a headline you will not find a kernel of truth until you read the last line of the text. A disgrace to journalism. No wonder Cam is thought to believe that Editor Dacre is unfit to be a peer - much to Dacre's annoyance.
I suppose my confusion is that you ever expected anything else from the Mail. The Express is forthright in being anti EU but never really strikes me as vindictive, just shallow. I wouldn't call it nasty. The Mail on the other hand does seem to gave an infinite capacity for being truly malicious and vindictive which seems to stem from a zealous moral certainty that is about a century out of date.
Sam Coates Good news. I'm told by a source in a position to know that Alan Mak will be given serious consideration for preferment at the next reshuffle
Probably the source is someone whose first name is Alan and whose surname has three letters...
Really? It is so vague as to make one wonder about dirty tricks from the anti-Mak cabal (assuming this bloke I can't be bothered to google is important enough to have enemies). Mak would not be in a position to know, so the best spin on it is that someone posed the question to a junior whip or maybe even Cameron's PPS and got the standard, non-committal answer that "X will be seriously considered".
At the last PMQs Jeremy Corbyn asked a question from “Rosie“, a fan of the Labour leader who opposes the government on housing. Afterwards, Rosie wrote on her Facebook about why she prefers Jezza to Dave. There are some choice words for the PM...
It will come as absolutely no surprise to readers that Rosie in fact works for the BBC:
Can this site's many polling experts clarify a few things about this latest ComRes poll please? It lists 1,000 weighted and unweighted respondents. For the key 65+ age group, the unweighted 254 is changed with weighting to 222 whereas in the much less likely to vote group of 18-25 the unweighted number rises from 86 to 114 with weighting.
Qn1: Is this a fair way to weight when the number of voters that will actually vote in the of 65+ age range is many times that in the 18-25?
Qn2: In the ratings for Certainty to Vote ( 9 and 10) the 18-25 certainty is 63% and the 65+ is 76%. This again seems to be out of line with the known reality on which types of voters, by age, will actually vote. Is it?
Qn3 The certainty to vote (10 rating) has Conservative voters with the 10 rating as less likely to vote than every party except the Greens...... Table 2/2 Shurely inaccurate?
If you apply turnout from the GE to the age groups and their relative proportion of the population 65 plus should be at least three times the size of 18-24.
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
Actually alot of those events are Heidi out and about. But for sure Cruz is trying to make sure of his home state.
Being seen to make so much effort in your home state and then losing it would be terminal I would have thought. At least Ed Balls had the excuse of spending most of his time campaigning for other people.
On DP the Labour peer Lord Hunt is attacking Jeremy Hunt over publishing a "6,000 excess deaths at weekend" figure fom civil servants last year rather than waiting for the real figure to come out which is 11,000....
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
If Trump has any sense, he'll hold it to the one rally in Texas.
Bear in mind Texas is already voting. The last thing Trump wants to do is actually win Texas. His best result is to get 30% or some such there with Cruz on ~ 35.
I don't know what it would take to get Cruz to pull out anyway. If he falls, and Rubio starts doing well enough to win the odd state, Cruz will want to stay in for leverage at the presumed convention. What bauble could Rubio plausibly promise him?
Both will stay in for the long-term, IMO. At least say Florida.
Could anyone copy/paste the Betfair odds atm? can't access at work.
Even on Guido's evidence, she's nowhere near news or current affairs. This really is small earthquake in Chile stuff, even by Guido's standards.
There is a serious question here or hereabouts since some companies have taken action against employees for social media posts on their private accounts, but I'd be surprised if there is a BBC-wide ban on writing to MPs, even if there should be one on tweeting about it afterwards.
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
If Trump has any sense, he'll hold it to the one rally in Texas.
Bear in mind Texas is already voting. The last thing Trump wants to do is actually win Texas. His best result is to get 30% or some such there with Cruz on ~ 35.
I don't know what it would take to get Cruz to pull out anyway. If he falls, and Rubio starts doing well enough to win the odd state, Cruz will want to stay in for leverage at the presumed convention. What bauble could Rubio plausibly promise him?
They're near enough the same age and ideologically almost identical (Rubio more Neocon on foreign policy, Cruz more rightwing on immigration). Vice presidency maybe ?
But Cruz would want Rubio to be his VP. If Cruz takes Texas and Rubio fails to hold Florida then that's the final nail in Rubio's coffin. If Cruz fails to take Texas the coffin may have a peep I guess.
Can this site's many polling experts clarify a few things about this latest ComRes poll please? It lists 1,000 weighted and unweighted respondents. For the key 65+ age group, the unweighted 254 is changed with weighting to 222 whereas in the much less likely to vote group of 18-25 the unweighted number rises from 86 to 114 with weighting.
Qn1: Is this a fair way to weight when the number of voters that will actually vote in the of 65+ age range is many times that in the 18-25?
Qn2: In the ratings for Certainty to Vote ( 9 and 10) the 18-25 certainty is 63% and the 65+ is 76%. This again seems to be out of line with the known reality on which types of voters, by age, will actually vote. Is it?
Qn3 The certainty to vote (10 rating) has Conservative voters with the 10 rating as less likely to vote than every party except the Greens...... Table 2/2 Shurely inaccurate?
The case for doing it this way is that if one both asks for certainty to vote, wieghts for that, and then also weights for demographic tendency, there is a serious risk of double-counting. The case against doing it this way is that people may underestimate, or more likely overestimate, their certainty to vote. What we don't know is whether the visible increase in engagement among younger voters will translate into a change of behaviour, as it has in the US, where Sanders has surprisingly got a lot of youngsters out.
For what it's worth, there was a post-election survey a few years ago which mapped professed certainty to vote against actually having voted. Assuming that people were telling the truth, there was a pretty straight trend line - people who said they were sure to vote usually did (though not always), and vice versa (though not always). I think that Tory certainty to vote at the moment is depressed by annoyance over Cameron and/or recoil from the in-fighting, so the findings may not be as odd as one might think.
Even on Guido's evidence, she's nowhere near news or current affairs. This really is small earthquake in Chile stuff, even by Guido's standards.
There is a serious question here or hereabouts since some companies have taken action against employees for social media posts on their private accounts, but I'd be surprised if there is a BBC-wide ban on writing to MPs, even if there should be one on tweeting about it afterwards.
I believe ALL BBC employees are warned about not to part take in social media activity of this nature.
Sam Coates Good news. I'm told by a source in a position to know that Alan Mak will be given serious consideration for preferment at the next reshuffle
Sam Coates Good news. I'm told by a source in a position to know that Alan Mak will be given serious consideration for preferment at the next reshuffle
Trump: VA, TX, OK, AR, TN Rubio: TX, TX, OK, GA Cruz: TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX, TX
God, that's pretty desperate for Cruz. The idea is usually that you don't need to campaign in your home state!
If Trump has any sense, he'll hold it to the one rally in Texas.
Bear in mind Texas is already voting. The last thing Trump wants to do is actually win Texas. His best result is to get 30% or some such there with Cruz on ~ 35.
I don't know what it would take to get Cruz to pull out anyway. If he falls, and Rubio starts doing well enough to win the odd state, Cruz will want to stay in for leverage at the presumed convention. What bauble could Rubio plausibly promise him?
Both will stay in for the long-term, IMO. At least say Florida.
Could anyone copy/paste the Betfair odds atm? can't access at work.
POTUS:
HRC 1.86/1.87 Sanders 16.5/17.5
GOP:
Trump 1.525/Rubi Oh 3.4 making up 95% of the market.
Sam Coates Good news. I'm told by a source in a position to know that Alan Mak will be given serious consideration for preferment at the next reshuffle
And who says that treason never prospers?
[I fear that my joke will be treated literally by some]
Hmm. As I pointed out last week, two by-elections in Broxtowe showed a 3% swing from Labour to Tory in this key marginal seat.
Yes, but as I replied, one of the two had a LibDem intervention with a popular local candidate which split the non-Tory vote down the middle (they hadn't stood there last time). It's difficult to generalise from local results, but I'd say the Broxtowe position is currently much like the General Election.
Fair enough I'd say... If an MP (or voter) was any less than 53-54% certain either way I think they should note campaign it vote either way
If you make something 53% you don't commit to going all in at Even money.
I'm surprised there aren't more fence sitters (used as an insult, but actually a valid position), and think that the overwhelming proportion of 'don't knows' will break for 'stay at home'
Speaking of Englishness, or lack thereof, read in the Mail the other day the BBC are thinking of having separate news for Scotland at six. Seems crackers to me.
Why, at present you have to wait till late at night to get any Scottish news. People here would like to here news with relevance to Scotland rather than just the limited London viewpoint. BBC news is pants. People want a Scottish news service and we pay plenty and don't get it.
Comments
Not quite Zac's £10 million in 5 years but Sadiq Khan has published his tax return - took home £300k over same time. https://t.co/nl0ZDaxSMw
General Election
Lincoln County which includes Area 51 (Nevada Republican nominations)
@tedcruz 44.56%
@realDonaldTrump 28.77%
@marcorubio 16.14%
Rubio looks like he will get trounced in Florida.
It's looking worse for Rubio on this measure.
The other problem is that he has ended up looking foolish when he could have made the very real point about how dangerous the ECJ is to UK intentions and the rule of law.
Do you know anyone in the pharmaceutical manufacturing business in Dundee? Think that's your part of the world?
It lists 1,000 weighted and unweighted respondents. For the key 65+ age group, the unweighted 254 is changed with weighting to 222 whereas in the much less likely to vote group of 18-25 the unweighted number rises from 86 to 114 with weighting.
Qn1: Is this a fair way to weight when the number of voters that will actually vote in the of 65+ age range is many times that in the 18-25?
Qn2: In the ratings for Certainty to Vote ( 9 and 10) the 18-25 certainty is 63% and the 65+ is 76%. This again seems to be out of line with the known reality on which types of voters, by age, will actually vote. Is it?
Qn3 The certainty to vote (10 rating) has Conservative voters with the 10 rating as less likely to vote than every party except the Greens...... Table 2/2 Shurely inaccurate?
(Assuming that Labour supporters are more likely to avoid tax at present by having little declared income but would be caught by a poll tax if they register)
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35647308
It does amaze me given the quality of the cameras on our tiny smart phones are these days, just how crap most CCTV is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3460930/Nobles-gone-wild-moment-Princess-Countess-took-topless-sword-fight-settle-dispute-flowers-1892-detailed-fascinating-video-duels.html
Here’s a very detailed academic view of what’s binding in the EU deal: https://t.co/T8tjb5GLdB Thanks to @ObiterJ for alerting me to it.
http://order-order.com/2016/02/24/corbyns-pmqs-ammo-from-bbc/
http://order-order.com/2016/02/24/is-jesse-a-burkean/
Starting to feel like Angels on Pinheads......
Could anyone copy/paste the Betfair odds atm? can't access at work.
There is a serious question here or hereabouts since some companies have taken action against employees for social media posts on their private accounts, but I'd be surprised if there is a BBC-wide ban on writing to MPs, even if there should be one on tweeting about it afterwards.
But Cruz would want Rubio to be his VP. If Cruz takes Texas and Rubio fails to hold Florida then that's the final nail in Rubio's coffin. If Cruz fails to take Texas the coffin may have a peep I guess.
For what it's worth, there was a post-election survey a few years ago which mapped professed certainty to vote against actually having voted. Assuming that people were telling the truth, there was a pretty straight trend line - people who said they were sure to vote usually did (though not always), and vice versa (though not always). I think that Tory certainty to vote at the moment is depressed by annoyance over Cameron and/or recoil from the in-fighting, so the findings may not be as odd as one might think.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3461345/PETER-OBORNE-principles-PM-accuses-Boris-self-Tories-flaunted-anti-EU-views-careers-first.html
HRC 1.86/1.87
Sanders 16.5/17.5
GOP:
Trump 1.525/Rubi Oh 3.4 making up 95% of the market.
Rest any price you like.
If you make something 53% you don't commit to going all in at Even money.
I'm surprised there aren't more fence sitters (used as an insult, but actually a valid position), and think that the overwhelming proportion of 'don't knows' will break for 'stay at home'