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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
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
Hammond really is a donkey of the first order, though he is just a sock puppet for this dire Tory government , full of powder puffs. Putin must have a really laugh when these pygmies come out from behind the sofa to call him names.
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.
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.
Unionists getting a taste of what the YES supporters got from them during the referendum. A joy to watch them being surprised that they are getting the same treatment as they doled out to Scotland. Long may it last.
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.
You don't trust the British people not to elect racists and homophobes: you couldn't sink any lower in mine.
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.
Some of the more extreme examples are an exact 'mirror' image of the Corbynites in Labour - so blinded by their fervour they cannot see 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.
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 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.
For all your self-righteousness, you are the bloke on here that spends most time shouting rude things at those that disagree. The vast majority of PB Remainers and Leavers alike are forthright in their views but don't do that. Its one thing to knock Cameron or Farage. Quite another to do it with people having a discussion with you.
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.
So the EU's long history of subverting referenda results it doesn't like isn't of importance - the thing which matters is that you regard Leavers as the 'Great Other'.
So anyone who doesn't share your views is a racist or a homophobe or an anti-democratic bigot and effectively unpatriotic.
In short they are evil and you are good.
Demonise the other and then destroy it.
TAKE IT FROM THEM AND GIVE IT TO ME TAKE IT FROM THEM AND GIVE IT TO ME TAKE IT FROM THEM AND GIVE IT TO ME
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
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.
Its one in two: EEA or bilateral trade deal. Never heard someone supporting Leave want something outside that.
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.
Hilarious stuff from someone utterly incapable of accepting the alternative view of Leave, and the democratic result of a vote to depart the EU, whilst painting rival supporters as 'monsters'.
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
Hopefully not , she will be crappier than Bush. Needs a shake up and Trump can provide that.
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)
There's a world of difference between being 'way too angry with the establishment' and putting the Trumpster in the White House.
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.
We understand and appreciate how busy you are. We see it every day when you regurgitate the same thread header material over and over again.
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
Bitter anti-communist Thatcher trained Pol Pot's army. Find that unlikely. Do you have a source??
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.
There's never been a shortage of applicants and if the UK leaves that won't change. It's ironic that if leave win and we join one of those allied organizations where we accept their rules but lose our vote and veto we might find ourselves obliged to admit 70 million Muslim Turks. Not at the top of the Leavers shopping list I suspect
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
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.
I was under the impression that, whatever the result, the prime minister of the day would decide what we try to do next. Unless it is the media moguls, of course.
Since the question is totally open to interpretation, it could be the loudest voices who do the interpreting of the result. And justify their pre-existing prjudices with a vague democratic seal of approval.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The deal don't ensure anything. Its not legally binding. Don't take my view on that. Take parliaments legal service view. The EP can change it, as can ECJ. And integrated Eurozone means much more block voting where we will get no input at all to rules that will govern our domestic economy.
If Remain win, I'm not expecting supporters of Leave to stage an armed uprising or a campaign of civil disobedience. They'll respect the result.
But, I wouldn't expect them to just give up, either. No one is under a moral duty to abandon one's beliefs, merely because one has lost a vote.
Indeed - a fair point which as you say applies to all. I'm just astonished at those who have suggested that Cameron would subvert the result. He is just not that kind of politician. If he was we wouldn't even be having the 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.
HCWBTFFPOTUS
Did you actually get re-elected as TOTY...or is "reigning" the more appropriate word?
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
Bitter anti-communist Thatcher trained Pol Pot's army. Find that unlikely. Do you have a source??
The source for the claim is Ta Mok, generally considered unreliable. Military assistance was given to Prince Sihanouk.
Mr. Die, quite. The deal is less convincing than when Septimius Severus promised to share the imperial power with Albinus whilst the former dealt with a third contender, Niger.
Shortly thereafter, Septimius decided ruling alone would be optimal, and crushed Albinus too.
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.
Because the Presidency is about inspiring people and vision. The Congress and State legislatures are about the hard graft of getting things done.
The American people, as a rule, are very practical. They want low taxes (so vote republican for the legislature) but want to feel good about themselves (so vote Democrat for the WH)
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
Bitter anti-communist Thatcher trained Pol Pot's army. Find that unlikely. Do you have a source??
Will Quigg, a grand dragon of the Klan’s California chapter and responsible for recruitment in the western United States, is less keen to give Mr Trump the dubious benefit of his support.
“We want Hillary Clinton to win,” Mr Quigg told The Telegraph. “She is telling everybody one thing, but she has a hidden agenda. She’s telling everybody what they want to hear so she can get elected, because she’s Bill Clinton’s wife, she’s close to the Bushes. [But] once she’s in the presidency, she’s going to come out and her true colours are going to show.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB Perhaps worth recalling that the last time that the Republicans won the White House without a Nixon or Bush on the ticket was 1928
Thats rubbish history Mike, Eisenhower won in 1953 and on leaving office warned of the dangers of Americas Military/Industrial complex, to which all governments have sucked up to ever afterwards.
I don't agree with everything Alistair Meeks writes, albeit he writes in a manner which is always coherent and interesting. Where I do agree with him is the groupthink view here appears to be:
A. Every statement by a leaver is principled and given for the best of motives;
B. The reverse holds true if it comes from remain;
C. To think on balance that remain is the better option makes one a traitor;
D. Negotiation is easy and compromise is for fools; and
E. One is not a proper Conservative is one does not support leave.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The deal don't ensure anything. Its not legally binding. Don't take my view on that. Take parliaments legal service view. The EP can change it, as can ECJ. And integrated Eurozone means much more block voting where we will get no input at all to rules that will govern our domestic economy.
And I would trust Cameron to act decisively in the event of any dodgy dealing. Or indeed any Conservative government. That is the difference between us - no big deal.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The deal don't ensure anything. Its not legally binding. Don't take my view on that. Take parliaments legal service view. The EP can change it, as can ECJ. And integrated Eurozone means much more block voting where we will get no input at all to rules that will govern our domestic economy.
And I would trust Cameron to act decisively in the event of any dodgy dealing. Or indeed any Conservative government. That is the difference between us - no big deal.
I think it would depend on PM in case of EP or ECJ changes. If Eurozone integrated and block votes on all sorts of laws over us, it wouldn't be a breech of deal. But would be disastrous development in changing our place in EU.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB Perhaps worth recalling that the last time that the Republicans won the White House without a Nixon or Bush on the ticket was 1928
Thats rubbish history Mike, Eisenhower won in 1953 and on leaving office warned of the dangers of Americas Military/Industrial complex, to which all governments have sucked up to ever afterwards.
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
Pol Pot's regime that was in power from 1976 to January 1979? What sort of assistance was Thatcher in a position to offer?
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
Pol Pot's regime that was in power from 1976 to January 1979? What sort of assistance was Thatcher in a position to offer?
She went over there herself to teach hand to hand combat...
I don't agree with everything Alistair Meeks writes, albeit he writes in a manner which is always coherent and interesting. Where I do agree with him is the groupthink view here appears to be:
A. Every statement by a leaver is principled and given for the best of motives;
B. The reverse holds true if it comes from remain;
C. To think on balance that remain is the better option makes one a traitor;
D. Negotiation is easy and compromise is for fools; and
E. One is not a proper Conservative is one does not support leave.
It's not terribly edifying.
Sorry, but that's complete bollocks. It would be accurate to say that some (but not all) leavers tend towards that view (some of the time).
I mentioned yesterday that a lot more people here were finding out for the first time what it's been like as a Labour supporter for the last decade. The tactic du jour seems to be to attack primarily by falsely characterising your opponents' stance as a kind of messianic, brook-no-dissent fervour, which constantly involves impugning the motives of your own side, making accusations of lying, hypocrisy, self-hatred, false consciousness.... etc.
It's classic Crosby playbook in particular as a manoeuvre to try and claim the "moderate" "centre" ground in any argument: we are normal, they are nasty ideological extremists, just look at how they behave.
Of course the internet makes this easier because on any side there are fuckwits who troll, insult, threaten death... and so on. But it's still stooping very low to insist that is the characteristic nature of your opponents.
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
Did you actually get re-elected as TOTY...or is "reigning" the more appropriate word?
I don't agree with everything Alistair Meeks writes, albeit he writes in a manner which is always coherent and interesting. Where I do agree with him is the groupthink view here appears to be:
A. Every statement by a leaver is principled and given for the best of motives;
B. The reverse holds true if it comes from remain;
C. To think on balance that remain is the better option makes one a traitor;
D. Negotiation is easy and compromise is for fools; and
E. One is not a proper Conservative is one does not support leave.
It's not terribly edifying.
Just to clarify. I think...
A. There are principled beliefs by Remainians.
B. There have been dishonest arguments from Leavers.
C. Remainians ain't traitors.
D. Negotiation and compromise are virtues and necessary, but Cameron did take steps that weakened his position.
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
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 take it then that in the event of a Leave vote, you would be opposed to any attempt to rejoin the EU under any circumstances. I would be surprised and gratified by this stance, but I suspect that in fact after a period 'in the cold', if all went badly, you would welcome Britain seeing the error of its ways, and being embraced back into the heart of Europe.
If that were to be a truer picture of your feelings, to complain that 'Leavers' will continue to campaign for Leave and not accept a 'Remain' result, would be rank hypocrisy.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
OT. Though I loathe Clarkson and never watch Top Gear I agree with those who have said Chris Evans grovelling apology was ridiculous and shows he has no idea how to make the brand dynamic again. Clarkson would have known better than to have offered a bland apology to outraged Daily Mail readers
I don't agree with everything Alistair Meeks writes, albeit he writes in a manner which is always coherent and interesting. Where I do agree with him is the groupthink view here appears to be:
A. Every statement by a leaver is principled and given for the best of motives;
B. The reverse holds true if it comes from remain;
C. To think on balance that remain is the better option makes one a traitor;
D. Negotiation is easy and compromise is for fools; and
E. One is not a proper Conservative is one does not support leave.
It's not terribly edifying.
Nor is it terribly edifying to use the label 'groupthink', backed up by false or exaggerated claims, on those with different views to yourself.
Or the labels 'racist', 'homophobe', 'subverter of democracy' etc.
The attempt to demonise people who hold different views and as a consequence invalidate those views is certainly unedifying and more importantly dangerous.
Mr. Roger, not sure you're on sound ground there. Clarkson's made a number of good programmes about WWII, including the St. Nazaire[sp] raid, and the Arctic convoys that provided materiel to the Russians.
Whilst he might delight in irking people and being provocative, I doubt Clarkson would do so when it comes to veterans (I think he's also a patron of Help for Heroes).
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
If you could find me one article, or quote from a mutual fund manager, that would be great.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
The attempt by the Leave campaign to paint Remain as some leap in the dark is the most amusing part of the debate so far.
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
If you could find me one article, or quote from a mutual fund manager, that would be great.
I don't have that as my personal conversations arent typically printed in the press. Do you have any articles suggesting I'm wrong??
The real question of the day, of course, is this: who has the bigger ego, Donald Trump or Sean Thomas? (I suspect that they are one and the same, after all, you never see them together...)
If Remain wins I will be relieved. Then like most on both sides I'll forget all about the EU again. This is not a subject most voters are passionate 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.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
If you want.
I prefer to listen to the EU when it says openly that its aim is Ever Closer Union.
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
If you could find me one article, or quote from a mutual fund manager, that would be great.
I think Martin Gilbert @ Aberdeen said it wouldn't make much difference?
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
If you could find me one article, or quote from a mutual fund manager, that would be great.
I don't have that as my personal conversations arent typically printed in the press. Do you have any articles suggesting I'm wrong??
On March 15th when you last made this claim Richard Nabavi responded:
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
If you want.
I prefer to listen to the EU when it says openly that its aim is Ever Closer Union.
Yet you don't want to listen to the agreement made with Cameron which leaves us outside this. Fair enough we're not going to agree.
If Remain wins I will be relieved. Then like most on both sides I'll forget all about the EU again. This is not a subject most voters are passionate about.
If Remain wins the battle will be regarding the next big story : Corbyn out vs Next Con leader.
The real question of the day, of course, is this: who has the bigger ego, Donald Trump or Sean Thomas? (I suspect that they are one and the same, after all, you never see them together...)
The real question of the day, of course, is this: who has the bigger ego, Donald Trump or Sean Thomas? (I suspect that they are one and the same, after all, you never see them together...)
I should guess they're both pretty small in all the comparatorsts when push comes to shove.
If Remain wins I will be relieved. Then like most on both sides I'll forget all about the EU again. This is not a subject most voters are passionate about.
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
If you could find me one article, or quote from a mutual fund manager, that would be great.
I don't have that as my personal conversations arent typically printed in the press. Do you have any articles suggesting I'm wrong??
On March 15th when you last made this claim Richard Nabavi responded:
The exceptions tend to be the smaller hedge funds.
It's garbage, and self-serving garbage.
The big multinational banks tend to be favour of remaining members. That's why JPM and GS are funding the Remain campaign.
The smaller companies, entrepreneurs, hedgies, brokers-dealers, etc are heavily skewed towards Brexit, but they don't the same airtime with the Corporation and others.
As a family, we are not taking a public view at the request of the chairman (who is an outside). But our leadership team, including two of the Patrimonials and three of the working partners are shifting quite markedly towards Brexit. I'm not sure where the third Patrimonial stands, but I suspect that he will probably vote the Leave eventually.
Hey Norfolk, would you either like to source your claim that mutual funds overwhelmingly oppose EEA with a source, or would you like to withdraw it?
If you go back to what I actually said, it was that in my experience that was the case. I.e. from people I speak to. I think most press coverage has said that mutual funds want to leave EU due to regulation, which obviously applies in EEA (I think finance laws will be included in famous 9%). As far as I know there ain't been any polling on it so can't be proven either way.
If you could find me one article, or quote from a mutual fund manager, that would be great.
I don't have that as my personal conversations arent typically printed in the press. Do you have any articles suggesting I'm wrong??
On March 15th when you last made this claim Richard Nabavi responded:
The exceptions tend to be the smaller hedge funds.
Am I missing something?? I have read that article twice and it just refers to divide over EU membership, nothing about EEA. Maybe I am reading too quickly...
The real question of the day, of course, is this: who has the bigger ego, Donald Trump or Sean Thomas? (I suspect that they are one and the same, after all, you never see them together...)
Simples - SeanT has the bigger ego, but Trump has the bigger hands.
Mr. 1000, alas, if only we had a Hannibal or Aurelian in charge.
I find the idea that government - in general - is a force for good in the world to be seriously misguided.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man 100 - dead in foreign wars 1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
I hardly think UK government should be withheld money from because of what Pol Pot and Stalin did.
British troops were used to train Pol Pot’s army. Our Cambodian guide, a few years ago, was very sniffy about Thatchers assistance to the regime in it’s early days.
Bitter anti-communist Thatcher trained Pol Pot's army. Find that unlikely. Do you have a source??
The source for the claim is Ta Mok, generally considered unreliable. Military assistance was given to Prince Sihanouk.
Future generations will be saying the source that said Cameron's Tories gave military assistance to Saudi Arabia- perhaps the most primitive and misogynistic country in the world- was unreiable
Under those circumstances, the demographers found, an increase of four percentage points in the proportion of whites backing Mr. Trump could flip eight states that Mr. Obama carried in 2012. That would give Mr. Trump a slim edge of 49.7 percent to 48.6 percent in the popular vote and 315 electoral votes — 45 more than needed to win the White House.
“It’s a hard thing to pull off,” said Ruy Teixeira, a co-author of the analysis who works at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. “But I certainly wouldn’t rule it out.”
Yet you don't want to listen to the agreement made with Cameron which leaves us outside this. Fair enough we're not going to agree.
I listened to it. The problem I have is that I don't trust the EU on this matter, which is exactly why I'll probably be voting leave, somewhat despite the leave campaign.
The trend within the EU has been towards ever-closer union, and they have a track record of getting around barriers on that path (witness second referendums). *If* there had been concerted talk for some time from the EU's leaders about this then I *might* have been more likely to believe them.
As it is, some reports are that EU leaders are already actively rowing away from it.
If you believe the assurances they gave Cameron, fair enough. I prefer to reluctantly rely on experience.
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
Too
For.
I have agreed with Alastair that, for the sake of our (up to now) good online relationship, which dates back many years, we will not engage each other directly below the line on the subject of the EU ref until after the vote. Because it does not bring out the best in either of us.
However, for the record, this is what I said last night: "I think we all know that it's precisely the prospect of Britain making its own decision for itself that scares Alastair.
Leave will never win over those who hate their own country, or distrust their own countrymen."
I don't think that Alastair hates his own country (to that extent, it was an unfortunate juxtaposition) but I do think he distrusts his own countrymen.
That is why I made the comment. If you think that by giving full democratic control to the UK you run a real risk of the UK becoming more xenophobic and intolerant, then you have a trust issue with the British electorate; one you feel can only be properly restrained by retaining a degree of international governance.
I think such a view is ludicrous and illogical, and very cynical, and I fundamentally disagree with it.
My point was that Leave will never win over people who make their assessment of which way to vote on that basis. There are others, of the Emma Thompson ilk, who simply have a disdain for their own nation.
So there is little point engaging with those who do so, because the argument will always tend to end in tears.
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
The attempt by the Leave campaign to paint Remain as some leap in the dark is the most amusing part of the debate so far.
That flight of fancy was dreamt up by Dominic Cummings
Resolution Foundation Private sector suffered deeper pay squeeze than public, but catching up fast – and will continue to do so https://t.co/Sp46aroXF0
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
I cannot attempt to try and get inside your head - the deal ensures our place within the EU in a manner I am comfortable with. A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
If you want.
I prefer to listen to the EU when it says openly that its aim is Ever Closer Union.
Yet you don't want to listen to the agreement made with Cameron which leaves us outside this. Fair enough we're not going to agree.
The people who are more knowledgeable than you or I re EU law and treaties regard Cameron's agreement as worthless.
Now you being a Cameron fan wish to believe him, I take a more sceptical view.
In any case whatever Cameron claims now has little effect on what might happen in five or ten years time.
After Merkel's migration policies its not wise to give assurances as to what might happen in a future EU.
Now if you'll forgive as I'm neither retired or a lawyer I have to do some work.
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
Too
For.
I have agreed with Alastair that, for the sake of our (up to now) good online relationship, which dates back many years, we will not engage each other directly below the line on the subject of the EU ref until after the vote. Because it does not bring out the best in either of us.
However, for the record, this is what I said last night: "I think we all know that it's precisely the prospect of Britain making its own decision for itself that scares Alastair.
Leave will never win over those who hate their own country, or distrust their own countrymen."
I don't think that Alastair hates his own country (to that extent, it was an unfortunate juxtaposition) but I do think he distrusts his own countrymen.
That is why I made the comment. If you think that by giving full democratic control to the UK you run a real risk of the UK becoming more xenophobic and intolerant, then you have a trust issue with the British electorate; one you feel can only be properly restrained by retaining a degree of international governance.
I think such a view is ludicrous and illogical, and very cynical, and I fundamentally disagree with it.
My point was that Leave will never win over people who make their assessment of which way to vote on that basis. There are others, of the Emma Thompson ilk, who simply have a disdain for their own nation.
So there is little point engaging with those who do so, because the argument will always tend to end in tears.
All a bit sad. All I would venture is that presumably you do believe in International Law applying during war-time and against dictators.
We've got the most exciting US Presidential race I can remember. We've got a raft of local elections coming here + Scottish Parliament + Welsh Assembly + NI Assembly + London mayor & Assembly + PCCs. There are 2 Parliamentary by-elections due. (Well, three if you count the one to replace Lord Avebury.) Every chance Ireland and Spain will both go back to the polls. And a quite exciting South Korean election in April. Yet every single thread just gets dominated by the EU referendum. This is why referendums should be banned: they're so boring...
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.
But which EU is that ?
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
.... A more integrated Eurozone would be good for the whole European economy - including those who have chosen to remain outside the Euro.
The EU is changing - it always has and always will - you can be happy with Britain's place within the EU as it moves onwards to Ever Closer Union.
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
Your assertions are just that. I take a different view.
The attempt by the Leave campaign to paint Remain as some leap in the dark is the most amusing part of the debate so far.
That flight of fancy was dreamt up by Dominic Cummings
I have agreed with Alastair that, for the sake of our (up to now) good online relationship, which dates back many years, we will not engage each other directly below the line on the subject of the EU ref until after the vote. Because it does not bring out the best in either of us.
However, for the record, this is what I said last night: "I think we all know that it's precisely the prospect of Britain making its own decision for itself that scares Alastair.
Leave will never win over those who hate their own country, or distrust their own countrymen."
I don't think that Alastair hates his own country (to that extent, it was an unfortunate juxtaposition) but I do think he distrusts his own countrymen.
That is why I made the comment. If you think that by giving full democratic control to the UK you run a real risk of the UK becoming more xenophobic and intolerant, then you have a trust issue with the British electorate; one you feel can only be properly restrained by retaining a degree of international governance.
I think such a view is ludicrous and illogical, and very cynical, and I fundamentally disagree with it.
My point was that Leave will never win over people who make their assessment of which way to vote on that basis. There are others, of the Emma Thompson ilk, who simply have a disdain for their own nation.
So there is little point engaging with those who do so, because the argument will always tend to end in tears.
This reminds me a little of those marital discussions which end in "We're not going to agree so let's leave it there. But I do have to say ONE LAST THING!"
Comments
The fantasy EU Cameron is selling to the voters, the actual EU, the ever closer union EU of next year, the ever closer union EU of ten years time ?
But, I wouldn't expect them to just give up, either. No one is under a moral duty to abandon one's beliefs, merely because one has lost a vote.
If you look at deaths caused by human beings the ratio is something like this:
1 - mudered by fellow man
100 - dead in foreign wars
1,000 - killed by own government
Giving money and power to the government is like giving whisky and car keys to teenagers.
Quite right too.
Cheltenham, Day 2
1.30 Yanworth
2.10 More Of That
2.50 Rock the Kasbah
3.30 Dodging Bullets
4.10 Cantlow
4.50 Missy Tata
5.30 Ballyandy
So anyone who doesn't share your views is a racist or a homophobe or an anti-democratic bigot and effectively unpatriotic.
In short they are evil and you are good.
Demonise the other and then destroy it.
TAKE IT FROM THEM AND GIVE IT TO ME
TAKE IT FROM THEM AND GIVE IT TO ME
TAKE IT FROM THEM AND GIVE IT TO ME
The EU won't be viewed as it is today.
We see it every day when you regurgitate the same thread header material over and over again.
Since the question is totally open to interpretation, it could be the loudest voices who do the interpreting of the result. And justify their pre-existing prjudices with a vague democratic seal of approval.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35818619
Shortly thereafter, Septimius decided ruling alone would be optimal, and crushed Albinus too.
The American people, as a rule, are very practical. They want low taxes (so vote republican for the legislature) but want to feel good about themselves (so vote Democrat for the WH)
Or http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-thatcher-helped-pol-pot/5330873
I realise they both refer to research by John Pilger, of course,
Perhaps worth recalling that the last time that the Republicans won the White House without a Nixon or Bush on the ticket was 1928
Thats rubbish history Mike, Eisenhower won in 1953 and on leaving office warned of the dangers of Americas Military/Industrial complex, to which all governments have sucked up to ever afterwards.
A. Every statement by a leaver is principled and given for the best of motives;
B. The reverse holds true if it comes from remain;
C. To think on balance that remain is the better option makes one a traitor;
D. Negotiation is easy and compromise is for fools; and
E. One is not a proper Conservative is one does not support leave.
It's not terribly edifying.
Trump 621
Cruz 396
Rubio 168 to direct
Kasich 66
Target 1237
But that's not the choice in the referendum - instead there is a REMAIN option which is intrinsically false.
I mentioned yesterday that a lot more people here were finding out for the first time what it's been like as a Labour supporter for the last decade. The tactic du jour seems to be to attack primarily by falsely characterising your opponents' stance as a kind of messianic, brook-no-dissent fervour, which constantly involves impugning the motives of your own side, making accusations of lying, hypocrisy, self-hatred, false consciousness.... etc.
It's classic Crosby playbook in particular as a manoeuvre to try and claim the "moderate" "centre" ground in any argument: we are normal, they are nasty ideological extremists, just look at how they behave.
Of course the internet makes this easier because on any side there are fuckwits who troll, insult, threaten death... and so on. But it's still stooping very low to insist that is the characteristic nature of your opponents.
A. There are principled beliefs by Remainians.
B. There have been dishonest arguments from Leavers.
C. Remainians ain't traitors.
D. Negotiation and compromise are virtues and necessary, but Cameron did take steps that weakened his position.
E. Plenty of us Leavers are NOT conservatives!!
Between Nov-Jan 2015 & Nov-Jan 2016 employment increased by 478k; unemployment fell by 171k https://t.co/GuLmo0JwcL https://t.co/oXyGTBeux0
#Employment rate 74.1% for Nov-Jan 2016, up from 73.3% a year earlier https://t.co/wUJC7oTKCW https://t.co/gu1sZTMI0E
#Unemployment rate 5.1% for Nov-Jan 2016, down from 5.7% a year earlier https://t.co/EXJY3Ez5FF https://t.co/ubCeDPxiiZ
If that were to be a truer picture of your feelings, to complain that 'Leavers' will continue to campaign for Leave and not accept a 'Remain' result, would be rank hypocrisy.
http://www.theweek.co.uk/top-gear/65189/clarkson-never-had-such-bad-taste-says-former-army-chief-over-top-gear-cenotaph-stunt?utm_source=taboola&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=TBROS2016
Or the labels 'racist', 'homophobe', 'subverter of democracy' etc.
The attempt to demonise people who hold different views and as a consequence invalidate those views is certainly unedifying and more importantly dangerous.
That applies to both sides of any discussion.
For Nov-Jan 2016 wages up 2.1% on a year earlier including bonuses, & 2.2% excluding bonuses https://t.co/lENN9CpuIs https://t.co/ynUQ1VNPLS
Public sector employment 5.347m in Dec 2015, up 3,000 on Sept – but down 50,000 on Dec 2014 https://t.co/bw2EqVsdmX
Priti Patel
Another strong set of employment figures, private sector employment at the highest since records began & near record 768,000 job vacancies
Whilst he might delight in irking people and being provocative, I doubt Clarkson would do so when it comes to veterans (I think he's also a patron of Help for Heroes).
The attempt by the Leave campaign to paint Remain as some leap in the dark is the most amusing part of the debate so far.
I prefer to listen to the EU when it says openly that its aim is Ever Closer Union.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-01-12/brexit-wouldn-t-be-disastrous-for-us-aberdeen-ceo
p.s. damn I've got a good memory
Also Terry Smith @ Fundsmith
http://www.portfolio-adviser.com/news/1027674/vote-brexit-terry-smith
Crispin Odey and Hugh Sloane also also big Brexit fans, but they are not really mutual fund managers. Not really mutual anything, to be honest
"http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/e90885d8-d3db-11e5-829b-8564e7528e54.html#axzz42y5SnqTW
The exceptions tend to be the smaller hedge funds.
One will dominate.
The big multinational banks tend to be favour of remaining members. That's why JPM and GS are funding the Remain campaign.
The smaller companies, entrepreneurs, hedgies, brokers-dealers, etc are heavily skewed towards Brexit, but they don't the same airtime with the Corporation and others.
As a family, we are not taking a public view at the request of the chairman (who is an outside). But our leadership team, including two of the Patrimonials and three of the working partners are shifting quite markedly towards Brexit. I'm not sure where the third Patrimonial stands, but I suspect that he will probably vote the Leave eventually.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/us/politics/donald-trump-white-voters.html?_r=0
Under those circumstances, the demographers found, an increase of four percentage points in the proportion of whites backing Mr. Trump could flip eight states that Mr. Obama carried in 2012. That would give Mr. Trump a slim edge of 49.7 percent to 48.6 percent in the popular vote and 315 electoral votes — 45 more than needed to win the White House.
“It’s a hard thing to pull off,” said Ruy Teixeira, a co-author of the analysis who works at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. “But I certainly wouldn’t rule it out.”
http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR130/filters/PARTY_ID_:2
Trump heading to the 50s in national polling.
The trend within the EU has been towards ever-closer union, and they have a track record of getting around barriers on that path (witness second referendums). *If* there had been concerted talk for some time from the EU's leaders about this then I *might* have been more likely to believe them.
As it is, some reports are that EU leaders are already actively rowing away from it.
If you believe the assurances they gave Cameron, fair enough. I prefer to reluctantly rely on experience.
I'm expecting serious wincing.
However, for the record, this is what I said last night: "I think we all know that it's precisely the prospect of Britain making its own decision for itself that scares Alastair.
Leave will never win over those who hate their own country, or distrust their own countrymen."
I don't think that Alastair hates his own country (to that extent, it was an unfortunate juxtaposition) but I do think he distrusts his own countrymen.
That is why I made the comment. If you think that by giving full democratic control to the UK you run a real risk of the UK becoming more xenophobic and intolerant, then you have a trust issue with the British electorate; one you feel can only be properly restrained by retaining a degree of international governance.
I think such a view is ludicrous and illogical, and very cynical, and I fundamentally disagree with it.
My point was that Leave will never win over people who make their assessment of which way to vote on that basis. There are others, of the Emma Thompson ilk, who simply have a disdain for their own nation.
So there is little point engaging with those who do so, because the argument will always tend to end in tears.
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/expect-eu-referendum-campaigns/1382012#KMVZX6TkwMBj7o8i.99
Resolution Foundation
Private sector suffered deeper pay squeeze than public, but catching up fast – and will continue to do so https://t.co/Sp46aroXF0
Now you being a Cameron fan wish to believe him, I take a more sceptical view.
In any case whatever Cameron claims now has little effect on what might happen in five or ten years time.
After Merkel's migration policies its not wise to give assurances as to what might happen in a future EU.
Now if you'll forgive as I'm neither retired or a lawyer I have to do some work.
Jonty Bonty from Millfield says leave them on the tube...