OT. The first glimmer for a peace in one of the most brutal and destabilizing civil wars we have seen and Philip Hammond sends schholboy insults to the one world leader who actually made this possible.
I'm so disgusted I'm not even going to brag about a first first
OT. Martin Parr comes out for 'Remain' for the simple reason that he loves travelling in a Europe without borders. Like his photography. Keep it simple
OT. The first glimmer for a peace in one of the most brutal and destabilizing civil wars we have seen and Philip Hammond sends schholboy insults to the one world leader who actually made this possible.
I'm so disgusted I'm not even going to brag about a first first
OT. The first glimmer for a peace in one of the most brutal and destabilizing civil wars we have seen and Philip Hammond sends schholboy insults to the one world leader who actually made this possible.
I'm so disgusted I'm not even going to brag about a first first
and yet the temptation was just too great
The "first game" is one of life's purest pleasures!
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
5 from 5 for Hillary surely leaves Sanders thinking hard about what the point is. Some are close and proportional but her lead is unassailable. Time for the Dems to unite I think.
Trump looks in a stronger position today with this being a much better super Tuesday for him than the last super Tuesday. Are Rubio's delegates freed to vote for who they want now or does he still have a say?
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
He said democratically.
I will accept, with foreboding and regret, a vote to Leave.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
He said democratically.
I will accept, with foreboding and regret, a vote to Leave.
Few Leavers are able to say the reverse.
So will I; then campaign for an EEA/EFTA style deal as close to EU membership as possible. It will facilitate us re-joining later ;-)
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
He said democratically.
I will accept, with foreboding and regret, a vote to Leave.
Few Leavers are able to say the reverse.
Rubbish. Of course Leavers will accept the result. What choice will they have. Doesn't mean they stop saying I told you so every time the EZ does something we don't like though. And the question will arise again the next time there is a new Treaty seeking further integration.
There is no shortage of nutters on both sides of this argument. Don't join them.
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
He said democratically.
I will accept, with foreboding and regret, a vote to Leave.
Few Leavers are able to say the reverse.
Rubbish. Of course Leavers will accept the result. What choice will they have. Doesn't mean they stop saying I told you so every time the EZ does something we don't like though. And the question will arise again the next time there is a new Treaty seeking further integration.
There is no shortage of nutters on both sides of this argument. Don't join them.
Most of your fellow Leavers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
He said democratically.
I will accept, with foreboding and regret, a vote to Leave.
Few Leavers are able to say the reverse.
So will I; then campaign for an EEA/EFTA style deal as close to EU membership as possible. It will facilitate us re-joining later ;-)
And you have every right to do that if you believe that is whats right for the country. I dont know why anyone else should think otherwise.
Rule 40b is getting a lot of attention - I gather this was created to stop another Ron Paul. Will it be kept, will the Rules Committee try to frame them to exclude Trump blah blah?
Wisdom seems to be that the Sore Loser factor would make it impossible for Trump to run as an independent, but such technical exclusions would implode the GOP.
It's almost impossible for Cruz to win, Kasich is a cock blocker, and Trump is highly likely to reach 1237 or very close.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
Its not fake democracy as long as you accept the need for the public to have their say again and reverse their position before changing policy. Whats undemocratic is going against the voters expressed will without asking them again, like what happened in Greece.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
You could have made it easier for those of us who didn't wade through last night's thread to find out what the slur was! I'm hopeful that this debate of our time is going to distill into two very simple but fundamental differeces in the way the two sides see the world and our place in it. Something even more primordial than the Scottish ref
Isn't Rubio still in control of them as he's suspended his campaign - not technically quit yet. His speech sounded like he wanted to be Ted Cruz, felt like he wants to point his there.
Even with them, I don't think that puts Cruz ahead. Need to check.
5 from 5 for Hillary surely leaves Sanders thinking hard about what the point is. Some are close and proportional but her lead is unassailable. Time for the Dems to unite I think.
Trump looks in a stronger position today with this being a much better super Tuesday for him than the last super Tuesday. Are Rubio's delegates freed to vote for who they want now or does he still have a say?
Rule 40b is getting a lot of attention - I gather this was created to stop another Ron Paul. Will it be kept, will the Rules Committee try to frame them to exclude Trump blah blah?
Wisdom seems to be that the Sore Loser factor would make it impossible for Trump to run as an independent, but such technical exclusions would implode the GOP.
It's almost impossible for Cruz to win, Kasich is a cock blocker, and Trump is highly likely to reach 1237 or very close.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
Its not fake democracy as long as you accept the need for the public to have their say again and reverse their position before changing policy. Whats undemocratic is going against the voters expressed will without asking them again, like what happened in Greece.
So the public are to be asked repeatedly until they reach the right answer? How very SNP.
I can see a case for a regular referendum on the subject. Once every forty years or so seems fair to me.
, Kasich is a cock blocker, and Trump is highly likely to reach 1237 or very close.
What is a 'cock blocker'?!!!
(The exclamation marks are in accordance with the grammatical rules enforced by the illiterate morons known by the collective noun of 'the DfE'.)
Please tell me they don't mandate the use of exclamation marks.
Only if the sentence begins with 'what' or 'how'. It may be of course that they simply don't know the difference between an exclamation mark and a question mark.
Rule 40b is getting a lot of attention - I gather this was created to stop another Ron Paul. Will it be kept, will the Rules Committee try to frame them to exclude Trump blah blah?
Wisdom seems to be that the Sore Loser factor would make it impossible for Trump to run as an independent, but such technical exclusions would implode the GOP.
It's almost impossible for Cruz to win, Kasich is a cock blocker, and Trump is highly likely to reach 1237 or very close.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
Unfortunately, it was a fair comment.
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
I've got the sort of psychological problem I hate. I could now close my big Rubio red on Betfair for a few quid at huge odds. But those huge odds are still too short. I don't need to free up the money but I hate seeing big reds like that.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
Unfortunately, it was a fair comment.
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
1) you've traduced my logic 2) you ignore the fact that it was suggested that I hate my country
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
Some bright spark PBer has been saying all along it would be a Clinton Trump contest in November but I'm afraid I simply can't recall which old Jacobite and reigning TOTY it was ....
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
Comprehension fail. Who were the VPs for Eisenhower and Reagan?
Aaah. OK
It doesn't necessarily mean very much but it's interesting nonetheless.
The Republicans seem to have a real problem getting a grip on the Presidency, yet do fine in state elections, gubernatorials, and the US congress.
I confess: I don't really know enough about American politics to truly understand why.
I am also unsure of the reasons for that.
Does the requirement to adopt certain swing-voter hostile positions in order to be nominated apply less in state and Congressional elections, or does it matter less because districts are gerrymandered to hell?
Fwiw, I do recall this being said about the Democrats back in 1988 - fine in Congress but have forgotten how to win the Presidency.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
I agree.
I've come down on the side of Leave because I've concluded that the government will go for EFTA-EEA or something functionally equivalent (and of course it's up to the government, not Leavers, what happens in the event of a Leave vote). But if the result is a Remain vote I will argue for full federalism: if we're going to be in we have to be fully in. Being reluctantly in doesn't help the rest of the EU and it doesn't help us (because it makes them resent us).
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
Indeed. Parties change, but it's impressive how they have swapped. Wonders if it could happen here. If the current Tory programme was shown blind to someone from the 80s, they might assume it was Labour.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Then vote Leave as its the only option you want that's on the table. The UK is not going to join the Euro any time soon.
Will the e mails come into play? Is it more likely Hilary would be prosecuted over them (if course it ever gets to that) before or after winning the nomination? And what happens in she is.. Does the second person step up?
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
Unfortunately, it was a fair comment.
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
1) you've traduced my logic 2) you ignore the fact that it was suggested that I hate my country
1) Really? What have I said that is inaccurate or illogical? 2) As I understand it, you're inferring something that wasn't implied.
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
Indeed. Parties change, but it's impressive how they have swapped. Wonders if it could happen here. If the current Tory programme was shown blind to someone from the 80s, they might assume it was Labour.
Debatable, but if you showed blind Corbyn and Labour's programme to someone from the 80s, I doubt they'd assume it was Tory. There hasn't been a reversal there, just a shift.
There's some really interesting demographic stuff going on, Sanders is picking up the white vote, especially males - Hillary the blacks.
Mississippi loved Trump even when painted as pointy hat wearer. Apparently, other GOPers spent $45m in the final week of Florida trying to kill him off. He got 450k more votes than Romney. He's Teflon.
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
Unfortunately, it was a fair comment.
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
1) you've traduced my logic 2) you ignore the fact that it was suggested that I hate my country
1) Really? What have I said that is inaccurate or illogical? 2) As I understand it, you're inferring something that wasn't implied.
I haven't the time to argue with those who can't read.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
He said democratically.
I will accept, with foreboding and regret, a vote to Leave.
Few Leavers are able to say the reverse.
Rubbish. Of course Leavers will accept the result. What choice will they have. Doesn't mean they stop saying I told you so every time the EZ does something we don't like though. And the question will arise again the next time there is a new Treaty seeking further integration.
There is no shortage of nutters on both sides of this argument. Don't join them.
Most of your fellow Leavers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
And likewise:
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you you should be vociferous on this issue.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
Its not fake democracy as long as you accept the need for the public to have their say again and reverse their position before changing policy. Whats undemocratic is going against the voters expressed will without asking them again, like what happened in Greece.
Greece is a complicated one.
The Greek voters voted for something that wasn't on offer. It would be like an election in 1976 on the IMF's terms for the bail-out of the UK economy. If we voted "No" the IMF terms, the IMF was under no obligation to 'respect' our views. Greece in 2014 - like the UK in 1976 - was the supplicant asking for money.
F1: Hamilton's being investigated by police for apparently taking a selfie (not sure if it's a photo, sounds like it might be a stream) whilst riding his motorbike.
Solid night for Trump knocking out Rubio in Florida and winning Illinois, North Carolina and Missouri with Kasich winning his home state. Great night for Hillary having likely won all 5 states. Hard to see past Trump v Clinton now though the nomination battle continues for another month or so with Trump v Cruz and Kasich and Sanders still battling on
On Bush and Nixon winning tickets not impossible next Republican president could be half Hispanic George P Bush in 2024
There's some really interesting demographic stuff going on, Sanders is picking up the white vote, especially males - Hillary the blacks.
Mississippi loved Trump even when painted as pointy hat wearer. Apparently, other GOPers spent $45m in the final week of Florida trying to kill him off. He's Teflon.
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
Not sure about Teflon. It did seem to slow his momentum *a bit* when the other candidates started to go all-out on him in debates. He doesn't come over so well when he's on the defensive. I'm sure the Democrats are looking very closely at that.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
But as the Daily Meeks assures on a daily basis, Remainers all want the same thing, to keep our position in the EU as it is now.
I must be slow, I've only just recognised Cameron's cunning plan.
Hold an EU referendum in June while there is a split Tory party, lance the boil (he hopes), artificially elevate Labour's council election results, and thus seal Jezza in place.
As a consequence ...Create a Tory hegemony for a decade. Have a statue put up to him. Have it pulled down next century when the seventeen-year-olds want a safe space.
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
Unfortunately, it was a fair comment.
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
1) you've traduced my logic 2) you ignore the fact that it was suggested that I hate my country
1) Really? What have I said that is inaccurate or illogical? 2) As I understand it, you're inferring something that wasn't implied.
I haven't the time to argue with those who can't read.
No answer, then. And you're concerned about others looking a berk?
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Denmark and Sweden, Hungary and Poland and the Czech Republic are also in the EU but outside the eurozone
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
Another example of Leaver false equivalence. For Remain, this is an argument. Most people on the Remain side see EU membership as a matter of second order importance. Most people on the Leave side see it as a crusade. If Britain votes Leave, we leave (the only person to suggest otherwise is a Leave campaigner). If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
And you're way too keen to make a point. I have been vociferous on the last point in the past.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Denmark and Sweden, Hungary and Poland and the Czech Republic are also in the EU but outside the eurozone
So how feasible is it for Trump to get over the line now?
Can he do it? WILL he do it?
I give you another opportunity to withdraw the slur you made last night.
No. It was not a slur; it was a fair comment.
And I will comment as I see fit on the EU referendum Alastair, and my perceptions of the motives of those who vote either way, based upon what they say, just as you do.
I was giving you the opportunity to look like less of a berk.
Unfortunately, it was a fair comment.
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
1) you've traduced my logic 2) you ignore the fact that it was suggested that I hate my country
1) Really? What have I said that is inaccurate or illogical? 2) As I understand it, you're inferring something that wasn't implied.
I haven't the time to argue with those who can't read.
No answer, then. And you're concerned about others looking a berk?
Read what was written. If you wish to associate with those who cast aspersions on the patriotism of others, go right ahead. You couldn't sink much lower in my estimation.
There's some really interesting demographic stuff going on, Sanders is picking up the white vote, especially males - Hillary the blacks.
Mississippi loved Trump even when painted as pointy hat wearer. Apparently, other GOPers spent $45m in the final week of Florida trying to kill him off. He got 450k more votes than Romney. He's Teflon.
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
I don't think the number of voters in a primary is that relevant for the general if you're appealing to the wrong market.
Corbyn received three times the votes Ed did. Does that mean he should be favourite to win the general election?
Mr. Meeks, the crusade comparison is false, in strategic terms. Crusades had to continually succeed or Outremer fell (which happened after a century or two). Leave needs only to win once.
Edited extra bit: on the comment below, it seems the investigation into Hamilton has started and been dropped due to lack of evidence.
There's some really interesting demographic stuff going on, Sanders is picking up the white vote, especially males - Hillary the blacks.
Mississippi loved Trump even when painted as pointy hat wearer. Apparently, other GOPers spent $45m in the final week of Florida trying to kill him off. He got 450k more votes than Romney. He's Teflon.
Reagan had Bush as his running mate, so Bush was on the ticket. Eisenhower had Nixon as his running mate.
Incredible to think as well that up to 1932 the Republicans had only ever lost four presidential elections (five if you count 1856, which was a sort of dry run for 1860). Shows how long ago it was!
Not so incredible when you think that the Republican's founding and initial victory in 1860 was the trigger for the Civil War which they won.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
I don't think the number of voters in a primary is that relevant for the general if you're appealing to the wrong market.
Corbyn received three times the votes Ed did. Does that mean he should be favourite to win the general election?
Some bright spark PBer has been saying all along it would be a Clinton Trump contest in November but I'm afraid I simply can't recall which old Jacobite and reigning TOTY it was ....
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Nah. The American people are way too angry with the establishment. DT=POTUS.
HRAWNBP (Hillary Rodham Antichrist will never be prez)
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Denmark and Sweden, Hungary and Poland and the Czech Republic are also in the EU but outside the eurozone
For now...
How will the EU force them to join against their will?
Edit to add: Denmark is effectively in the Eurozone. It's currency is pegged the to the Euro with a tiny (0.25%?) window.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
No, we won't. Leaver false equivalence is becoming an epidemic round here. There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
The winners will not decide the post referendum settlement, but the country as a whole. So, the Leave campaign does not get to choose on its own the terms of exit. And nor does the Remain camp get to choose what our relationship looks like going forward.
Some bright spark PBer has been saying all along it would be a Clinton Trump contest in November but I'm afraid I simply can't recall which old Jacobite and reigning TOTY it was ....
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Nah. The American people are way too angry with the establishment. DT=POTUS.
HRAWNBP (Hillary Rodham Antichrist will never be prez)
Another example of Leaver false equivalence. For Remain, this is an argument. Most people on the Remain side see EU membership as a matter of second order importance. Most people on the Leave side see it as a crusade. If Britain votes Leave, we leave (the only person to suggest otherwise is a Leave campaigner). If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
And you're way too keen to make a point. I have been vociferous on the last point in the past.
Tbf nobody who wants votes for Remain is going to give a shred of support to the idea that it might be safe to vote Leave because we won't really leave even then.
You seem to rule out the possibility that those who support Remain would push for us to rejoin in the future. I find that quite surprising and I don't see why it would be the case unless one is trying to make a point about some inherent bad faith being present in one side of the argument only. I'm sure the Mandelsons of this world and various representatives of the CBI, City institutions etc would frequently argue for the advantages of getting back into the EU if we were outside. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, it's the nature of democracy for everything to be up for grabs, even the reversal of recent decisions.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
No, we won't. Leaver false equivalence is becoming an epidemic round here. There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward.
Really? And yet less than a dozen posts down thread there's a comment suggesting exactly that. Full integration, rather than Billy No Mates watching from the sidelines.
And as RCS helpfully points out, Remain voters wouldn't be dictating the terms anyway. You do realise that don't you?
Some bright spark PBer has been saying all along it would be a Clinton Trump contest in November but I'm afraid I simply can't recall which old Jacobite and reigning TOTY it was ....
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Nah. The American people are way too angry with the establishment. DT=POTUS.
HRAWNBP (Hillary Rodham Antichrist will never be prez)
The people are enthusiastic for someone who has promised things he cannot deliver:
- the Mexican government paying for the wall - Apple moving all its manufacturing back to the US
Given that; how is Trump (really) different from politicians everywhere?
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Denmark and Sweden, Hungary and Poland and the Czech Republic are also in the EU but outside the eurozone
It will be interesting to see their reaction in the event of a Leave vote.
One of the greatest fears that the EU will have is of Leaver Contagion. It will become particularly acute if an especially impacted eurozone member starts thinking about it.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
No, we won't. Leaver false equivalence is becoming an epidemic round here. There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward.
That may be true as far as it goes. But the question is likely to be whether the half-hearted semi-detached arrangement the PM envisages and thinks he may have got will really be tenable given the way the rest of the EU - and the eurozone in particular - is likely to develop in the next few years. This is, I think, likely to create future strains in the relationship. I'm not at all sure that this referendum - or the so far somewhat pitiful public debate around it - will really have helped matters.
Some bright spark PBer has been saying all along it would be a Clinton Trump contest in November but I'm afraid I simply can't recall which old Jacobite and reigning TOTY it was ....
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Nah. The American people are way too angry with the establishment. DT=POTUS.
HRAWNBP (Hillary Rodham Antichrist will never be prez)
The people are enthusiastic for someone who has promised things he cannot deliver:
- the Mexican government paying for the wall - Apple moving all its manufacturing back to the US
Given that; how is Trump (really) different from politicians everywhere?
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
Another example of Leaver false equivalence. For Remain, this is an argument. Most people on the Remain side see EU membership as a matter of second order importance. Most people on the Leave side see it as a crusade. If Britain votes Leave, we leave (the only person to suggest otherwise is a Leave campaigner). If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
And you're way too keen to make a point. I have been vociferous on the last point in the past.
I'm not a Leaver I'm a cynic.
You again ignore that the EU has a long history of subverting the results of referenda it doesn't like - if this issue is so important to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
If you want to cast aspersions on subverting referenda results then start with the organisation that does it.
To claim that if Britain votes Leave Britain leaves is drivvel - none of us knows what will happen after a Leave vote.
As to 'city region' mayors - if you were vociferous in your hostility then I don't remember. Still I'm sure they will be mentioned again and you will have the opportunity to display your thoughts.
And you're frothing in your self-righteousness - which is sad to see as you're one of the people I respect most on this site.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
No, we won't. Leaver false equivalence is becoming an epidemic round here. There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward.
Really? And yet less than a dozen posts down thread there's a comment suggesting exactly that. Full integration, rather than Billy No Mates watching from the sidelines.
If you were to take pb as representative of the public mood, Michael Gove would be wildly popular and Ted Heath would be being exhumed and tried posthumously for treason.
Missouri: 19 February 2016: Today, the state Legislature voted in a new Congressional map and changed the date of the U.S. House Primaries to Tuesday 7 June 2016. All other primaries will continue to be on Tuesday 15 March. The revised filing period is 16 to 25 March. The Democrats plan to contest the latest map. We are not sure if this will affect the delegate selection plan. !
"There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward."
There never was, but that didn't and won't stop the EU proceeding into a Political Union. In 1975, it dare not speak its name, but now it can be loud and proud ... even though it may have to tip-toe around for a while. Remember, it stopped all wars for the last 70 years (NATO? Who he?).
I wish it would be honest for once. As far as I'm concerned, I was lied to in 1975 and I feel annoyed, both with them and with myself. But as the song goes, "Won't get fooled again."
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
If remain wins you will not see that argument from any in the Conservative camp or many elsewhere except possibly from the likes of Tim Farron - and even then I'd doubt it. Most 'remain' supporters see the EU as flawed but better than the alterntives. Leave supporters? - perm any one from 10.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
No, we won't. Leaver false equivalence is becoming an epidemic round here. There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward.
That may be true as far as it goes. But the question is likely to be whether the half-hearted semi-detached arrangement the PM envisages and thinks he may have got will really be tenable given the way the rest of the EU - and the eurozone in particular - is likely to develop in the next few years. This is, I think, likely to create future strains in the relationship. I'm not at all sure that this referendum - or the so far somewhat pitiful public debate around it - will really have helped matters.
I think it's made it worse to be honest.
Two groups of liars shouting at each other across a room.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions: here, but we don't want to be here, we will come with you, but not that far or fast, hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Denmark and Sweden, Hungary and Poland and the Czech Republic are also in the EU but outside the eurozone
It will be interesting to see their reaction in the event of a Leave vote.
One of the greatest fears that the EU will have is of Leaver Contagion. It will become particularly acute if an especially impacted eurozone member starts thinking about.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
snip
If Britain votes Remain, we'll get to hear the In camp squabbling about whether the UK goes in deep, or keeps the status quo. There will be a lot of disappointed people.
No, we won't. Leaver false equivalence is becoming an epidemic round here. There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward.
Except for the views of the Leader of the Opposition, the last Deputy PM, and the last two PMs.
Some bright spark PBer has been saying all along it would be a Clinton Trump contest in November but I'm afraid I simply can't recall which old Jacobite and reigning TOTY it was ....
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Nah. The American people are way too angry with the establishment. DT=POTUS.
HRAWNBP (Hillary Rodham Antichrist will never be prez)
The people are enthusiastic for someone who has promised things he cannot deliver:
- the Mexican government paying for the wall - Apple moving all its manufacturing back to the US
Given that; how is Trump (really) different from politicians everywhere?
I think the world would be in better shape if governments did less rather than more.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you why should be vociferous on this issue.
Another example of Leaver false equivalence. For Remain, this is an argument. Most people on the Remain side see EU membership as a matter of second order importance. Most people on the Leave side see it as a crusade. If Britain votes Leave, we leave (the only person to suggest otherwise is a Leave campaigner). If Britain votes Remain, we hear the Leavers start their next campaign.
And you're way too keen to make a point. I have been vociferous on the last point in the past.
I'm not a Leaver I'm a cynic.
You again ignore that the EU has a long history of subverting the results of referenda it doesn't like - if this issue is so important to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
If you want to cast aspersions on subverting referenda results then start with the organisation that does it.
To claim that if Britain votes Leave Britain leaves is drivvel - none of us knows what will happen after a Leave vote.
As to 'city region' mayors - if you were vociferous in your hostility then I don't remember. Still I'm sure they will be mentioned again and you will have the opportunity to display your thoughts.
And you're frothing in your self-righteousness - which is sad to see as you're one of the people I respect most on this site.
Too right I'm furious. With 100 days to go we've already reached the point where it's not possible to point out the laughable flaws in Leaver groupthink without being told I hate my own country.
This fake democracy, where only one side is supposed to have any homourable insight, is a cancer eating at the nation's polity. It must be defeated.
I fear for this country if the fake democrats win, not because leaving the EU is the be all and end all but because it will represent the triumph of those who cannot accept alternative views, who fear the other and who are afraid of complex problems.
Comments
I'm so disgusted I'm not even going to brag about a first first
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/martin_parr_lifes_a_beach.do
You illustrate with such remarks why Leave needs to be defeated. Like so many other Leavers, you're a fake democrat, unwilling to accept a public vote unless it is decided in your favour. You're fundamentally unable to accept that others can take a different view of the matter with integrity and patriotism. You're willing to destroy every part of the political culture of this country in order to succeed on this one minor point.
This fake democracy movement needs to be crushed.
Trump looks in a stronger position today with this being a much better super Tuesday for him than the last super Tuesday. Are Rubio's delegates freed to vote for who they want now or does he still have a say?
All the pundits were Ooh, saying it was highly significant and a sign that the RNC knew they had to build some bridges.
Michael something?
Few Leavers are able to say the reverse.
There is no shortage of nutters on both sides of this argument. Don't join them.
The Republicans seem to have a real problem getting a grip on the Presidency, yet do fine in state elections, gubernatorials, and the US congress.
I confess: I don't really know enough about American politics to truly understand why.
Wisdom seems to be that the Sore Loser factor would make it impossible for Trump to run as an independent, but such technical exclusions would implode the GOP.
It's almost impossible for Cruz to win, Kasich is a cock blocker, and Trump is highly likely to reach 1237 or very close.
(The exclamation marks are in accordance with the grammatical rules enforced by the illiterate morons known by the collective noun of 'the DfE'.)
Even with them, I don't think that puts Cruz ahead. Need to check.
Are you a secret Geordie Shore fan?
That's the only other place I can recall hearing the expression before.
I can see a case for a regular referendum on the subject. Once every forty years or so seems fair to me.
God, they were annoying.
George WWW Bush?
You said that you're voting remain (and I'm paraphrasing here) because a Leave vote would see the racists and homophobes gain more power in the country.
But such people can only gain power in the UK by being elected by the British people.
Ergo, you don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes.
Saying you don't like the British people is one step further, but I don't like people who would elect racists and homophobes. But since I trust the British people not to, this doesn't apply to me.
In meaning in the EU properly, Shengen, Euro and full participation, whereby as a central player we may have some influence and some friends as opposed to sitting outside in a semi permanent sulk doing a perfect impression of Billy No Mates.
Out meaning Out, which may well end up as Billy No Mates as well.
To select the middle ground that feels like we are always in one of these positions:
here, but we don't want to be here,
we will come with you, but not that far or fast,
hey! hold on, that won't suit our special interests
I don't want to be a part of a club that we are in constant conflict with. We will not reap the benefit, share the reward or forge long trustworthy relationships with our partners.
Either in or out are the only logical positions for long term stability and success.
Personally I don't care which so long s it isn't an attempt at the status quo. In ultimate destination of EU is to integrate and then to fragment into national units or regions as it becomes too authoritarian, unwieldy or fractured by economic and nationalistic stresses. That may be 5 years or 55 years.
Stay strong, Alastair.
Have a good day everyone
2) you ignore the fact that it was suggested that I hate my country
Surprised the combined score is so short of 100%, but there we are.
More incredible is that the party of Lincoln is now the party of the southern white vote, while the party for slavery gets almost all of the black vote.
Hilary Clinton Will Be The Forty Fifth President Of The United States.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Does the requirement to adopt certain swing-voter hostile positions in order to be nominated apply less in state and Congressional elections, or does it matter less because districts are gerrymandered to hell?
Fwiw, I do recall this being said about the Democrats back in 1988 - fine in Congress but have forgotten how to win the Presidency.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-35815444
I've come down on the side of Leave because I've concluded that the government will go for EFTA-EEA or something functionally equivalent (and of course it's up to the government, not Leavers, what happens in the event of a Leave vote). But if the result is a Remain vote I will argue for full federalism: if we're going to be in we have to be fully in. Being reluctantly in doesn't help the rest of the EU and it doesn't help us (because it makes them resent us).
And what happens in she is.. Does the second person step up?
2) As I understand it, you're inferring something that wasn't implied.
Mississippi loved Trump even when painted as pointy hat wearer. Apparently, other GOPers spent $45m in the final week of Florida trying to kill him off. He got 450k more votes than Romney. He's Teflon.
Most of your fellow Remainers will be starting immediately after the referendum result to subvert it if they lose. Plenty on here are quite happy to admit that.
The EU has a long history of subverting referenda that it loses - if this is such an issue to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
There is also the issue of English mayors - North-East devolution was voted down, City mayors were voted down yet Osborne is now imposing new 'City Region' mayors without local people being allowed to vote whether they want one or not.
If subverting the results of referenda was so important to you you should be vociferous on this issue.
The Greek voters voted for something that wasn't on offer. It would be like an election in 1976 on the IMF's terms for the bail-out of the UK economy. If we voted "No" the IMF terms, the IMF was under no obligation to 'respect' our views. Greece in 2014 - like the UK in 1976 - was the supplicant asking for money.
On Bush and Nixon winning tickets not impossible next Republican president could be half Hispanic George P Bush in 2024
Hold an EU referendum in June while there is a split Tory party, lance the boil (he hopes), artificially elevate Labour's council election results, and thus seal Jezza in place.
As a consequence ...Create a Tory hegemony for a decade. Have a statue put up to him. Have it pulled down next century when the seventeen-year-olds want a safe space.
And you're way too keen to make a point. I have been vociferous on the last point in the past.
Corbyn received three times the votes Ed did. Does that mean he should be favourite to win the general election?
Edited extra bit: on the comment below, it seems the investigation into Hamilton has started and been dropped due to lack of evidence.
HRAWNBP (Hillary Rodham Antichrist will never be prez)
Edit to add: Denmark is effectively in the Eurozone. It's currency is pegged the to the Euro with a tiny (0.25%?) window.
The Establishment aren't doing anything for these people, no wonder they're sick of them, their fake concern and lobbyist money.
You seem to rule out the possibility that those who support Remain would push for us to rejoin in the future. I find that quite surprising and I don't see why it would be the case unless one is trying to make a point about some inherent bad faith being present in one side of the argument only. I'm sure the Mandelsons of this world and various representatives of the CBI, City institutions etc would frequently argue for the advantages of getting back into the EU if we were outside. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, it's the nature of democracy for everything to be up for grabs, even the reversal of recent decisions.
And as RCS helpfully points out, Remain voters wouldn't be dictating the terms anyway. You do realise that don't you?
- the Mexican government paying for the wall
- Apple moving all its manufacturing back to the US
Given that; how is Trump (really) different from politicians everywhere?
One of the greatest fears that the EU will have is of Leaver Contagion. It will become particularly acute if an especially impacted eurozone member starts thinking about it.
You again ignore that the EU has a long history of subverting the results of referenda it doesn't like - if this issue is so important to you then you should wish to leave such an organisation.
If you want to cast aspersions on subverting referenda results then start with the organisation that does it.
To claim that if Britain votes Leave Britain leaves is drivvel - none of us knows what will happen after a Leave vote.
As to 'city region' mayors - if you were vociferous in your hostility then I don't remember. Still I'm sure they will be mentioned again and you will have the opportunity to display your thoughts.
And you're frothing in your self-righteousness - which is sad to see as you're one of the people I respect most on this site.
Trump 0 (OH)
Trump 52 (Il)
Trump 99 (Fl)
Trump 30 (NC)
Missouri: 19 February 2016: Today, the state Legislature voted in a new Congressional map and changed the date of the U.S. House Primaries to Tuesday 7 June 2016. All other primaries will continue to be on Tuesday 15 March. The revised filing period is 16 to 25 March. The Democrats plan to contest the latest map. We are not sure if this will affect the delegate selection plan. !
Trump has 12 delegates from the state anyway
"There is absolutely no appetite anywhere for anything beyond the sort of halfhearted semidetached arrangement that the Prime Minister is putting forward."
There never was, but that didn't and won't stop the EU proceeding into a Political Union. In 1975, it dare not speak its name, but now it can be loud and proud ... even though it may have to tip-toe around for a while. Remember, it stopped all wars for the last 70 years (NATO? Who he?).
I wish it would be honest for once. As far as I'm concerned, I was lied to in 1975 and I feel annoyed, both with them and with myself. But as the song goes, "Won't get fooled again."
Two groups of liars shouting at each other across a room.
I agree that Leave contagion is a real threat, that's one of the main WTF issues I have with the dismal deal Cameron came back with.
Clearly don't think we're serious.
Richard Nixon was Eisenhower's VP
This fake democracy, where only one side is supposed to have any homourable insight, is a cancer eating at the nation's polity. It must be defeated.
I fear for this country if the fake democrats win, not because leaving the EU is the be all and end all but because it will represent the triumph of those who cannot accept alternative views, who fear the other and who are afraid of complex problems.