All surveys on the backgrouds of immigrants are consistent on one point.
Somalis are the nationals who put in the least, and take out the most. I wouldn't have 'em.
Interesting, I'd wrongly assumed that was the Roma. Under our current immigration policy we should be able to refuse entry to Somalis. I've never knowingly met one.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
I agree but I was impessed that someone from a constituency where they make their living rearing sheep would be openly vegetarian. It suggested he might have principles which would make him rare among party leaders at the moment and more so among aspiring ones
In May it is entirely possible that Labour will suffer a serious set ...
This really ought to make Corbyn more vulnerable. In fact it is possible by the time that the EU referendum comes around that he will already not be leader.
Cameron, in contrast, is very likely to win his referendum albeit at the cost of considerable damage to his party. I don't think this will hit him directly but be more focussed at possible successors, specifically Osborne. If so, and if we assume that Cameron still wants his friend to replace him, then it is likely that Cameron will hang around for quite a while in the hope that things calm down again with a "unity cabinet" in place.
Each of these guesstimates could go wrong and politics is unusually febrile at the moment but taking the most likely scenarios it seems to me that these odds are probably right, certainly not so clearly out of line as to constitute serious value.
I doubt labour MPs will move on Corbyn this side of eu referendum.
I don't think Labour MPs care that much about the EU referendum. It seems to be an entirely Tory/UKIP gig with not much of the latter.
For many Labour MPs, British membership of the EU is a fundamental totem of their politics.
I'm sure that is right but I see almost no sign of them fighting for it. And Alan Johnson is once again showing that he was right in understanding his own limitations.
The fact is that the only people that matter in this referendum are Tory politicians. They will decide what happens after 23rd June, no-one else.
Do you think that would hold true if Blair was Labour leader......
As Robert Harris tweeted watching yesterday's 1966 GE coverage - Labour has gone from an Oxford Double First to two Es at A Level......
There has, I fear, been an undercurrent of Dreaming Spires snobbery in the media for some time. It may be no coincidence that leaders who have not spent three years at Oxford struggled to be taken seriously: Brown, Kinnock and Callaghan for Labour; Major and IDS for the Conservatives.
Was that anything to do with their intelligence though? Between them, they fought six elections and won one (and that one was between two on the list, so a win one way was guaranteed). It's clearly not just the media that had trouble taking them seriously.
"Somalis are adept fraudsters and Muslims are inclined to rape? Just another day on PB comments"
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
You and your fellow lefties are just as wrong and out of touch as the right wing nut jobs though. They think all immigrants are vile scum, bringing fgm, forced marriage, benefit fraud and rape to the country. In your world, all immigrants are beautiful, decent people, fleeing persecution and injustice, who are only coming here to enrich our life with their history, arts and culture. You're both wrong, and you all do the rest of the country a disservice with your extreme views.
Personally I think immigrants are people, and in my experience “people” all oover the world can be any of, vile scum, beautiful, decent, have cultural ptactices I find repugnant and so on. Sometimes all at the same time!
I don't believe you. That's a far too common sense approach!
Unless Leave win the EU ref (which IMO is unlikely), Cameron will survive to step down at a time of his own choosing later in this Parliament. Corbyn will be vulnerable to adverse results at the ballot box, which seem quite likely (London mayoralty election excepted).
If Khan wins, as London Mayor he will have a much bigger democratic mandate than Corbyn. Which he could use to great effect as a springboard to the top job in Labour....
Has he not promised to stand down as an MP if he wins? He could find himself trapped and on the side lines in the same way as Boris did.
We'll see how quickly he moves on that by-election. Expect delays...
Khan's mob in Tooting are certainly gearing up for a by-election and so is he. Labour are feeling very confident about the scheming git winning at the moment,even though most hate him.
If the "scheming git" - or "proven winner" as the Mayor would like to think himself - judges he can replace Corbyn within 12 months, that by-election ain't happening....
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Pretty much precisely what one would expect The Guardian to say and also probably a reasonably accurate assessment. Unfortunately, Dave made a huge error of judgement in terms of rushing through the renegotiation process, thereby severely limiting the prospect of achieving meaningful concessions from our EU partners. He then compounded that error by deciding to hold the referendum thereon just four months later ..... it's almost as if he viewed the entire business as being a rather unnecessary irritant, to be dispensed with asap.
That may be so, but a Leave vote would necessitate the serving of Article 50 two years before the dissolution of this parliament to enable the government to honour both a referendum commitment and outcome, so the actual deadline for serving it is March 2018.
Dave's decision effectively buys up to 21 months of preparation and pre-notice negotiation time.
The EU then finds itself in a position of losing it's second largest economy, a £20bn gross contributor, the provider of five million jobs (gross), nearly a fifth of it's GDP.
Then there are five more pauper nations lining up to enter.
A few nations will be looking on and thinking, "what the hell are we doing sticking with us?"
In May it is entirely possible that Labour will suffer a serious set back in Scotland (almost certain) and come third (possible but unlikely). They may well suffer the loss of their majority in Wales (likely) whilst remaining the largest party. And they may well suffer a modest net loss of councillors. Outwith London where Kahn is looking a comfortable winner good news is going to be hard to find despite the main opposition (outside Scotland) being a seriously divided Tory party.
Each of these guesstimates could go wrong and politics is unusually febrile at the moment but taking the most likely scenarios it seems to me that these odds are probably right, certainly not so clearly out of line as to constitute serious value.
I doubt labour MPs will move on Corbyn this side of eu referendum.
I don't think Labour MPs care that much about the EU referendum. It seems to be an entirely Tory/UKIP gig with not much of the latter.
For many Labour MPs, British membership of the EU is a fundamental totem of their politics.
I'm sure that is right but I see almost no sign of them fighting for it. And Alan Johnson is once again showing that he was right in understanding his own limitations.
The fact is that the only people that matter in this referendum are Tory politicians. They will decide what happens after 23rd June, no-one else.
Do you think that would hold true if Blair was Labour leader......
As Robert Harris tweeted watching yesterday's 1966 GE coverage - Labour has gone from an Oxford Double First to two Es at A Level......
There has, I fear, been an undercurrent of Dreaming Spires snobbery in the media for some time. It may be no coincidence that leaders who have not spent three years at Oxford struggled to be taken seriously: Brown, Kinnock and Callaghan for Labour; Major and IDS for the Conservatives.
Would you consider the hypothesis that some of them were, you know, not very good at the job?
(I'd exclude Callaghan & Major from that....) and of course John Smith (Glasgow) was taken pretty seriously......
"Somalis are adept fraudsters and Muslims are inclined to rape? Just another day on PB comments"
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
You and your fellow lefties are just as wrong and out of touch as the right wing nut jobs though. They think all immigrants are vile scum, bringing fgm, forced marriage, benefit fraud and rape to the country. In your world, all immigrants are beautiful, decent people, fleeing persecution and injustice, who are only coming here to enrich our life with their history, arts and culture. You're both wrong, and you all do the rest of the country a disservice with your extreme views.
Personally I think immigrants are people, and in my experience “people” all oover the world can be any of, vile scum, beautiful, decent, have cultural ptactices I find repugnant and so on. Sometimes all at the same time!
I don't believe you. That's a far too common sense approach!
Is that a serious gun crime problem among London's youth, or just a massive police over-reaction to kinds with water pistols? The scary thing is that with Met Police it could well be either.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
If LEAVE regard abdicating responsibility a virtue, that's rather their funeral.
"But we didn't want this sort of LEAVE. Tough.
And which part of 'an end to UK participation in 'ever closer Union' do you read as will Cameron take us into full integration?
Is that a serious gun crime problem among London's youth, or just a massive police over-reaction to kinds with water pistols? The scary thing is that with Met Police it could well be either.
I have some sympathy with the police in these cases. Some imitation guns are so realistic that you cannot tell whether they are real or not without some study. then you get the problem of decommissioned guns, etc, etc.
The situation is made more complex by the fact that some kids carry real guns, and AIUI some gangs use kids to run both guns and drugs - if they get arrested the courts are more lenient.
The police have to take a report of a gun seriously. So they need to get in there, make the scene safe, arrest whoever has the reported gun, and then they can sort things out in time.
Good spot. It's hard to see Corbyn being forced out at any point before 2020 - Labour doesn't do defenestration and the membership remains largely enthusiastic; the opponents are still at an early stage with no obvious alternative candidate with an attractive programme to tempt people. Essentially betting that he'll go is a bet on his standing down voluntarily (or falling under a bus), and my reading of him is that he thinks it's his duty to socialism to plug on, and anyone who bets against his dedication to duty is absolutely on a loser. I don't think it's even affected by the May results, even London - they may increase or reduce the chance of a challenge, but if there's a challenge in 2016 he'll win.
By contrast, Cameron has said he'll go, simple as that. Might take a while, but probably not. He gives me the impression that he's really had enough of the job and almost everyone around him.
The German minister for immigration has told Bild that he is going to introduce laws to force the new arrivals to integrate or be denied indefinite right to remain and eventually forcibly deported. Sounds good until the first human rights case based on article 8, right to a family life, is brought and the Germans lose and this law is found to be in violation of it.
Honestly, it sounds like something we would try to do over here and fail at achieving because of the ECHR.
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE4EU - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors For European Union
This result wouldn't surprise me in the least. I would hope for Leave to score above 45%, I think that could be considered a good result and would open the door for a rerun in 10 years when the Leavers have completely taken the Tory party over and we, hopefully, have a Leave PM who will swing the whole party machine behind Leave.
I agree - it might be a tad closer to 60-40, but 56-44 would be a comfortable win.
DC won't be going anytime soon.
If DC becomes unpopular in the country, or just simply no longer a net electoral asset, and there is a clear, credible alternative Tory leader that looks like a winner then I think DC will go and he will go quickly, by a '22 vote if necessary.
However, if he's just unpopular and resented amongst a third of the parliamentary party post EU-ref, he will limp on and his position will resemble Thatcher c.1989-1990 or Major 1995-1997.
I don't think Cameron can reattain the love for him of post May 2015. That ship has sailed.
I have to say I was expecting Jack's ARSE to be closer to 60-40. It will be interesting to see if it moves one way or the other as polling day approaches.
Unless Leave win the EU ref (which IMO is unlikely), Cameron will survive to step down at a time of his own choosing later in this Parliament. Corbyn will be vulnerable to adverse results at the ballot box, which seem quite likely (London mayoralty election excepted).
If Khan wins, as London Mayor he will have a much bigger democratic mandate than Corbyn. Which he could use to great effect as a springboard to the top job in Labour....
Has he not promised to stand down as an MP if he wins? He could find himself trapped and on the side lines in the same way as Boris did.
We'll see how quickly he moves on that by-election. Expect delays...
Khan's mob in Tooting are certainly gearing up for a by-election and so is he. Labour are feeling very confident about the scheming git winning at the moment,even though most hate him.
If the "scheming git" - or "proven winner" as the Mayor would like to think himself - judges he can replace Corbyn within 12 months, that by-election ain't happening....
Interesting thought. Khan for leader of the opposition. Mayor of London will give him a higher profile than Corbyn. Perhaps he should keep his seat for a year or so
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Don't start this bull about "%age of the electorate" as two can play at that game. The Tories got the support and implicit support of 59% of the electorate. Every other party and independent combined only got 41% of the electorate.
Based on JackW's projections for both the referendum result and the turnout, Ladbroke's odds of 5/4 (decimal 2.25) against Remain Wins and Turnout is Less than 65% , therefore appears to offer a reasonable margin of safety in respect of both elements and for me represents an attractive bet, but DYOR.
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE4EU - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors For European Union
This result wouldn't surprise me in the least. I would hope for Leave to score above 45%, I think that could be considered a good result and would open the door for a rerun in 10 years when the Leavers have completely taken the Tory party over and we, hopefully, have a Leave PM who will swing the whole party machine behind Leave.
One of my objections to referenda is that the losers feel a "right" for a re-run in short order and for spurious reasons and a whole merry go round of uncertainty prevails.
Salmond said once in a generation/lifetime for SINDY. Nobody thought he meant that of a fruit fly.
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Don't start this bull about "%age of the electorate" as two can play at that game. The Tories got the support and implicit support of 59% of the electorate. Every other party and independent combined only got 41% of the electorate.
Roger, in Broxtowe, which I don't think was untypical, from memory town councillors get nothing, borough councillors get about £4000/year and county councillors I think something like £10000 a year. Both borough and county offer more if you chair committees etc., and council leaders get quite a lot more.
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE4EU - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors For European Union
This result wouldn't surprise me in the least. I would hope for Leave to score above 45%, I think that could be considered a good result and would open the door for a rerun in 10 years when the Leavers have completely taken the Tory party over and we, hopefully, have a Leave PM who will swing the whole party machine behind Leave.
One of my objections to referenda is that the losers feel a "right" for a re-run in short order and for spurious reasons and a whole merry go round of uncertainty prevails.
Salmond said once in a generation/lifetime for SINDY. Nobody thought he meant that of a fruit fly.
The funny thing is that the people who object to referenda tend to favour the status quo...
Perhaps we wouldn't be in this position if we had had a referendum every time we gave a bit of our sovereignty away.
But, wasn't the ARSE significantly in error in the margin of the Sindy win for IN? I recollect the ARSE was predicting 60:40. Much more bullish than the actual result.
A similar bias in methodology here could leave the E-indy on a knife-edge.
The ARSE's great triumph was the General Election, not the Sindy.
The German minister for immigration has told Bild that he is going to introduce laws to force the new arrivals to integrate or be denied indefinite right to remain and eventually forcibly deported. Sounds good until the first human rights case based on article 8, right to a family life, is brought and the Germans lose and this law is found to be in violation of it.
Honestly, it sounds like something we would try to do over here and fail at achieving because of the ECHR.
It would be far better not to let in people whom you feel are unlikely to integrate or who appear to have no desire to. And here numbers are important. The greater the number in a particular community, the less need there is for new arrivals to integrate.
I don't see how you can sensibly have a Law for Forced Integration. What you can have are lots of small measures which cumulatively make it clear that in Germany you have to live like a German and not as if you are still in your country of origin eg no translation of documents or interpreting services so that you have to speak the language, prosecution of crimes regardless of cultural sensitivities, teaching immigrants about German values, particularly those very different to those in home countries, making leave to remain conditional on good behaviour etc.
There are three essential elements to any good immigration policy:-
1. The consent of the existing population to (a) the need for immigration; (b) the numbers; and ( c) the type of immigrants. 2. Allowing in only those groups and, within the chosen groups, those individuals who are of benefit to the host country. This involves making judgments. Not all of those who want to come to a country are desirable. The Left's big problem is that it seems to think that someone's demand to be let in (especially if it is volubly and emotively expressed) should be the only criterion on which a decision should be based. 3. The ability to remove - effectively - those who arrive illegally and those who break their side of the bargain, by breaking the rules during a probationary period.
Roger, in Broxtowe, which I don't think was untypical, from memory town councillors get nothing, borough councillors get about £4000/year and county councillors I think something like £10000 a year. Both borough and county offer more if you chair committees etc., and council leaders get quite a lot more.
Thanks Nick. Someone asked me last night and it's something I'd never thought about
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
You LibDems couldn't get 33.9% of the population enthused enough to vote at all. Measure of your level of failure....
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Tim Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
The new Morning Consult is noteworthy for two reasons. Trump hits a new all time high, but also Kasich has dropped back down to where he was before. Despite being a three man race I have yet to see much evidence he can get into the 30s, given he struggles to get in the 20s. Of course he is running for VP but it is futile if he can't pick up more support. Some are desperate for him to drop out however they forget his 66 Ohio delegates would then go to Trump. http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/morning-consult-24158
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Don't start this bull about "%age of the electorate" as two can play at that game. The Tories got the support and implicit support of 59% of the electorate. Every other party and independent combined only got 41% of the electorate.
How on earth do you work that out, Mr Thompson?
If you want to be silly enough to look at the electorate rather than voters then the people who can't be arsed to vote are clearly ok with any outcome. Add the winner and the abstentions together to form the percentage ok with the winner.
Add the losing votes together to find those who weren't.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Nick Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
Nick Farron? Tim Farron is an evangelical Christian, not an RC.
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
You LibDems couldn't get 33.9% of the population enthused enough to vote at all. Measure of your level of failure....
Alas no, Mr Mark. We were contaminated by the association with the Tories.
For you Tories, it worked in reverse, and people thought you were going to continue with Coalition policies.
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE4EU - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors For European Union
This result wouldn't surprise me in the least. I would hope for Leave to score above 45%, I think that could be considered a good result and would open the door for a rerun in 10 years when the Leavers have completely taken the Tory party over and we, hopefully, have a Leave PM who will swing the whole party machine behind Leave.
One of my objections to referenda is that the losers feel a "right" for a re-run in short order and for spurious reasons and a whole merry go round of uncertainty prevails.
Salmond said once in a generation/lifetime for SINDY. Nobody thought he meant that of a fruit fly.
Jack, could you give us a theoretical ARSE4EU where the PM has backed Leave in that case. Unless you are saying that a Tory party united behind Leave and the government machine working in favour of Leave as well as the PM campaigning for Leave would have no effect then there would be grounds for a new referendum, assuming this one is close. Even in your current projection would require only a 6 point swing for Leave to win it, if a future PM backs Leave/Out or whatever it is called in the future then surely those 6 points are in the bag and the majority of the country would back leaving, which is enough for a new vote.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Nick Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
Not too surprising, but the line that caught my eye was this: "It says five other nations - Australia, Finland, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand - have pledged more than half of their fare share. In contrast, the UK is set to take 22% of its fair share, the US just 7%, and France only 4%."
Sweden, merely over half their fair share? That seems odd given, I think, they had an open door policy.
No call for (by the same token) the Calais camp migrants to immediately claim asylum in France, then.
Don't be silly, haven't you heard what a backward 3rd world war torn unstable country France is...
"Somalis are adept fraudsters and Muslims are inclined to rape? Just another day on PB comments"
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
You and your fellow lefties are just as wrong and out of touch as the right wing nut jobs though. They think all immigrants are vile scum, bringing fgm, forced marriage, benefit fraud and rape to the country. In your world, all immigrants are beautiful, decent people, fleeing persecution and injustice, who are only coming here to enrich our life with their history, arts and culture. You're both wrong, and you all do the rest of the country a disservice with your extreme views.
It's Ok Mr Firestopper.
Roger is an " guerrier Fauteuil" and a "Gauche caviar" as he lives in a chateau in the posh end of France and thus remains totally unaffected by the constant demands he makes for the rest of us here in the Uk.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Nick Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
I didn't think he was Catholic but no matter. He is the MP for the area where my other half's family come from. He works very hard, unlike his predecessor who took the electorate for granted and eventually paid the price.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Tim Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Don't start this bull about "%age of the electorate" as two can play at that game. The Tories got the support and implicit support of 59% of the electorate. Every other party and independent combined only got 41% of the electorate.
How on earth do you work that out, Mr Thompson?
If you want to be silly enough to look at the electorate rather than voters then the people who can't be arsed to vote are clearly ok with any outcome. Add the winner and the abstentions together to form the percentage ok with the winner.
Add the losing votes together to find those who weren't.
You would make almost as good a Chancellor as Osborne, Mr Thompson!
On topic I think Remain will win comfortably and Cameron will stay on. He is by far the best thing the Tories have and they would be mad to ditch him prematurely. None of his possible successors come close - at the moment anyway - and those Tories who think that playing games withe leadership is some sort of cost- free exercise need to grow up. They have a small majority and a Corbyn led Labour government would be one hell of a FUBAR.
Alas no, Mr Mark. We were contaminated by the assoccciation with the Tories.
(Snip)
True, but only to an extent. They didn't help themselves by giving ammunition to their opponents on the left. Many of the Lib Dem's problems are down to decisions made by Clegg et al very early on in the coalition.
But their biggest problem is that many of their voters in 2005 and 2010 leant the party their votes as protest against New Labour's policies. They were not instinctive Lib Dem supporters. With Labour moving slowly to the left under Miliband, the Lib Dems would have suffered against a Milibandite Labour even if they had not been in coalition.
However, I am quite hopeful that the Lib Dems are going to slowly recover. Their local election results are nowhere near as bad as they could be, and that's where they should build from.
And they also need to find a political position that is distinct and saleable. And I think there is a market for it. Relying on NOTA is not a sustainable option, as they found out this year.
Blindly blaming the coalition for the party's problems will just lead to more failure.
We now have 2nd generation Somali's, who are adults in the UK. They are, I believe, the worst performing ethnic group at school, employment, etc, along with Bangladeshi's. The reason for that I do not know.
In comparison, the likes of the Chinese outperform everybody I believe.
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
I agree but I was impessed that someone from a constituency where they make their living rearing sheep would be openly vegetarian. It suggested he might have principles which would make him rare among party leaders at the moment and more so among aspiring ones
I wouldn't expect an MP to tailor his diet to match the produce of his constituency. Could have very unfortunate consequences for some.
When the BBC tell you they don't have money for anything, that government squeeze means can't afford programmes like "What the Papers Say" on R4....what the f##k are they doing getting into micro computers (AGAIN). Yes I know partners have put money, but this is diverting resources, time, energy etc, where there is already loads of very low cost commercial solutions.
On topic I think Remain will win comfortably and Cameron will stay on. He is by far the best thing the Tories have and they would be mad to ditch him prematurely. None of his possible successors come close - at the moment anyway - and those Tories who think that playing games withe leadership is some sort of cost- free exercise need to grow up. They have a small majority and a Corbyn led Labour government would be one hell of a FUBAR.
I had to check twice that you'd written that. I agree with it all. Worst case is 'leave' closely followed by Cameron being replaced closely followed by Corbyn taking over. All those would create a crisis as daunting as any we've suffered since the worst days of John Major's government (92-95)
On topic I think Remain will win comfortably and Cameron will stay on. He is by far the best thing the Tories have and they would be mad to ditch him prematurely. None of his possible successors come close - at the moment anyway - and those Tories who think that playing games withe leadership is some sort of cost- free exercise need to grow up. They have a small majority and a Corbyn led Labour government would be one hell of a FUBAR.
On topic I think Remain will win comfortably and Cameron will stay on. He is by far the best thing the Tories have and they would be mad to ditch him prematurely. None of his possible successors come close - at the moment anyway - and those Tories who think that playing games withe leadership is some sort of cost- free exercise need to grow up. They have a small majority and a Corbyn led Labour government would be one hell of a FUBAR.
Hello Miss Cyclefree - yes I agree with you that Cameron is by far the best thing associated with the Conservative party and Corbyn is probably the worst thing associated with the Labour party. However the divisions in Europe and the fall-out of the IDS affair, i.e. the Tories rob from the poor and vulnerable and give to the rich and privileged will continue to resonate for some time and this can only help Labour (potentially significantly).
Labour will comfortably win the London mayoral election and they will outperform expectations in the local elections (Scotland will be a disaster for them though).
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Tim Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
I know MaxPB (who normally knows his onions when it comes to tech, especially Sony for obviously reasons) poo poo'ed this, but looks like it is true...
I went to a function last night where Tim Farron was the main man. I liked him. He was a vegetarian and a transparently decent human being as was his audience. He saved his bile for IDS and those in the UK who lack compassion particularly to immigrants.
Then this morning I switched on PB and there was this parallel universe where those mean spirited people from Farron's imagination were alive and posting.
Why does it matter if Farron eats meat (or fish) or not. That he’s a transparently decent human being is far more important. IIRC the last political leader who could be so described was David Steel.
It gets so confusing, though. I could swear that a while back Farron was being criticised for his Christianity which apparently did not make him a decent human being. And now, pace Roger, sympathy for immigrants is the key, regardless of whether they're law breakers and regardless of the impact on those already in a country. No room for sympathy for them - sneering at those who might have some concerns seems a given. On that basis the Archbishop of Canterbury must be a very bad man.
As I say, confusing.
I've just checked and Nick Farron did abstain on gay marriage but I don't think that's a character point against him considering he takes his Catholicism seriously
So it's okay to not support gay marriage so long as you belong to a major religion like Catholicism?
You have to accept for some people some things are just too important. He did the best he could which was abstain. I wouldn't judge him harshly for that
I agree - it might be a tad closer to 60-40, but 56-44 would be a comfortable win.
DC won't be going anytime soon.
If DC becomes unpopular in the country, or just simply no longer a net electoral asset, and there is a clear, credible alternative Tory leader that looks like a winner then I think DC will go and he will go quickly, by a '22 vote if necessary.
However, if he's just unpopular and resented amongst a third of the parliamentary party post EU-ref, he will limp on and his position will resemble Thatcher c.1989-1990 or Major 1995-1997.
I don't think Cameron can reattain the love for him of post May 2015. That ship has sailed.
It seems to me that a key element in the situation is the absence of a credible alternative that looks like a winner and is also backing Leave.
Mr. Urquhart, mu understanding (not sure if Mr. Max is here to reply) is that he said the PS4.5, as some dub it, would be about integrated VR/4K, rather than enhanced specifications (ie, all PS4 games would remain playable on the PS4 original console).
That said, a mid-generation version may be something that sits poorly. It depends whether people view it as they did the slim version of old consoles, or as an upgrade that's essentially better (if the extra bits can be added to an 'old' PS4 with peripherals that would diminish any backlash).
Mr. Urquhart, mu understanding (not sure if Mr. Max is here to reply) is that he said the PS4.5, as some dub it, would be about integrated VR/4K, rather than enhanced specifications (ie, all PS4 games would remain playable on the PS4 original console).
That said, a mid-generation version may be something that sits poorly. It depends whether people view it as they did the slim version of old consoles, or as an upgrade that's essentially better (if the extra bits can be added to an 'old' PS4 with peripherals that would diminish any backlash).
I thought he said just VR integration, nothing more? But I could be wrong.
When the BBC tell you they don't have money for anything, that government squeeze means can't afford programmes like "What the Papers Say" on R4....what the f##k are they doing getting into micro computers (AGAIN). Yes I know partners have put money, but this is diverting resources, time, energy etc, where there is already loads of very low cost commercial solutions.
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE4EU - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors For European Union
This result wouldn't surprise me in the least. I would hope for Leave to score above 45%, I think that could be considered a good result and would open the door for a rerun in 10 years when the Leavers have completely taken the Tory party over and we, hopefully, have a Leave PM who will swing the whole party machine behind Leave.
One of my objections to referenda is that the losers feel a "right" for a re-run in short order and for spurious reasons and a whole merry go round of uncertainty prevails.
Salmond said once in a generation/lifetime for SINDY. Nobody thought he meant that of a fruit fly.
Yes, because a referendum kicks an issue way up the agenda so that it doesn't feel "settled" by the result, even though it should do.
However, as time passes events move on, the issue may sink down the agenda again and it may turn out to have been settled after all.
The new Morning Consult is noteworthy for two reasons. Trump hits a new all time high, but also Kasich has dropped back down to where he was before. Despite being a three man race I have yet to see much evidence he can get into the 30s, given he struggles to get in the 20s. Of course he is running for VP but it is futile if he can't pick up more support. Some are desperate for him to drop out however they forget his 66 Ohio delegates would then go to Trump. http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/morning-consult-24158
Alot of commentators and the polls suggest that California will follow Arizona broadly. Do you think that's right ?
Do you have any idea about New Mexico ? More like Arizona, Texas or Colorado ?
iirc What the Papers Say used to be an ITV television programme. I cannot see why it should be expensive but looking how it has been shunted around from ITV to BBC TV to radio makes me wonder if there is not more to it.
When the BBC tell you they don't have money for anything, that government squeeze means can't afford programmes like "What the Papers Say" on R4....what the f##k are they doing getting into micro computers (AGAIN). Yes I know partners have put money, but this is diverting resources, time, energy etc, where there is already loads of very low cost commercial solutions.
I know MaxPB (who normally knows his onions when it comes to tech, especially Sony for obviously reasons) poo poo'ed this, but looks like it is true...
I've not been following this closely, but given they're working hard on virtual reality, it makes sense that they may need to raise the hardware to make the most out of it. And graphics hardware has improved a lot in the two-and-a-half years since the PS4 was released.
I know MaxPB (who normally knows his onions when it comes to tech, especially Sony for obviously reasons) poo poo'ed this, but looks like it is true...
Yeah, I saw the WSJ article over the weekend and had to do a double take. I would be very, very surprised to see a half-step console release. The whole idea behind a console being a closed system means you really shouldn't have them and the industry is littered with half-step failures. I still think it will be a PS4 with the same basic hardware, a bigger hard drive, a 4K Blu-ray drive and HDMI 2.0 port with the VR add on box integrated into the main unit which would add about 0.5TF in terms of CPU processing power. If it was a full refresh with a new GPU and new CPU to run 4K games they will have a lot of unhappy people (including me!) who bought the PS4 at release despite it having no games (it still doesn't have many) only for them to make it obsolete.
The other theory is that they are going to have a "double PS4" with a new APU with exactly double the current power of the normal PS4 and sell it for $499/£429 alongside the vanilla PS4 at $299/£249. Games would be made for the base unit and then the "double PS4" would be programmed to use the extra power for higher resolutions or higher framerates. I wouldn't be bothered by that as long as the current unit is the benchmark and the new one is just there for people who want to run at higher resolutions but with no actual advantage in terms of development for a higher spec.
The referendum question is meaningless. Whatever the result, the Tories and their spin machine can interpret is any way they want.
No - even a retreat to EEA membership is a big improvement from the current situation. Only the government would have you think different.
Not at all. As things stand, a vote for LEAVE can mean anything between EEA membership (as you say) and complete isolation. Who knows which of these Cameron would go for?
So Ms Vance is also completely wrong. It is not up to the LEAVE campaign to say what LEAVE would mean. It is up to Mr Cameron.
Likewise if we go for REMAIN. Will this mean a continuation of carping nagging from the sidelines, as at present, or will Cameron take us into full integration?
I think he ought to come clean with the electors now, before we start to vote.
We have a thing called democracy to help us answer that. The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow.
That doesn`t mean very much, does it, Mr Herdson? "The government will work within what the representative parliament, and what the electorate allow." !!!!
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Don't start this bull about "%age of the electorate" as two can play at that game. The Tories got the support and implicit support of 59% of the electorate. Every other party and independent combined only got 41% of the electorate.
How on earth do you work that out, Mr Thompson?
If you want to be silly enough to look at the electorate rather than voters then the people who can't be arsed to vote are clearly ok with any outcome. Add the winner and the abstentions together to form the percentage ok with the winner.
Add the losing votes together to find those who weren't.
You would make almost as good a Chancellor as Osborne, Mr Thompson!
Mr. Jessop, the reason people may be annoyed is that the whole point of consoles is their convenience. You buy one, that's it for 7 years or so. Just plug in and play. PCs have better capabilities but are fiddlier, that's the trade-off.
At the moment, I'm not too fussed. If the PS4.5 starts getting games the PS4 can't play, then I'll be annoyed.
That said, aren't 4K TVs hugely expensive? Not sure I need any more pixels (and I only bought a new TV a couple of years ago).
If it's an extra, that's one thing. But if we end up with 4K-only games [no idea if that'd happen], people would be pissed off.
It's bound to happen eventually just like HD is now effectively standard definition. You don't get many 16 bit games anymore and one day 4k will be just normal if not quaint.
Comments
Somalis are the nationals who put in the least, and take out the most. I wouldn't have 'em.
Edited .... sp.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of the first ARSE4EU Referendum Projection :
Should The United Kingdom Remain A Member Of The European Union Or Leave The European Union?
Remain 56% .. Leave 44%
Turnout Projection 61.5%
......................................................................
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
JNN - Jacobite News Network
ARSE4EU - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors For European Union
I agree - it might be a tad closer to 60-40, but 56-44 would be a comfortable win.
DC won't be going anytime soon.
The electorate will already have voted in the referendum - but it will be up to Mr Cameron to interpret what the result means. ie it agrees with whatever he wants to do, but we have no way of knowing that, in advance, unless he spells it out.
And don`t start talking about "democracy", please. You Tories could not even get the support of 25% of the electorate at the last election, despite twisting the rules to grossly overspend in individual constituencies.
Is that a serious gun crime problem among London's youth, or just a massive police over-reaction to kinds with water pistols? The scary thing is that with Met Police it could well be either.
Dave's decision effectively buys up to 21 months of preparation and pre-notice negotiation time.
The EU then finds itself in a position of losing it's second largest economy, a £20bn gross contributor, the provider of five million jobs (gross), nearly a fifth of it's GDP.
Then there are five more pauper nations lining up to enter.
A few nations will be looking on and thinking, "what the hell are we doing sticking with us?"
(I'd exclude Callaghan & Major from that....) and of course John Smith (Glasgow) was taken pretty seriously......
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/576800-egypt-air-flight-hijack-2.html
As I say, confusing.
"But we didn't want this sort of LEAVE. Tough.
And which part of 'an end to UK participation in 'ever closer Union' do you read as will Cameron take us into full integration?
I have some sympathy with the police in these cases. Some imitation guns are so realistic that you cannot tell whether they are real or not without some study. then you get the problem of decommissioned guns, etc, etc.
The situation is made more complex by the fact that some kids carry real guns, and AIUI some gangs use kids to run both guns and drugs - if they get arrested the courts are more lenient.
The police have to take a report of a gun seriously. So they need to get in there, make the scene safe, arrest whoever has the reported gun, and then they can sort things out in time.
By contrast, Cameron has said he'll go, simple as that. Might take a while, but probably not. He gives me the impression that he's really had enough of the job and almost everyone around him.
I'm sure Chestnut will be up there like a rat up a drainpipe proving that those figures point to a comfortable win for 'Leave'
Honestly, it sounds like something we would try to do over here and fail at achieving because of the ECHR.
With the London Mayor elections coming up, how has your area voted in the past? Explore here:https://t.co/kQsBO7hcpe https://t.co/cFBObK4V74
However, if he's just unpopular and resented amongst a third of the parliamentary party post EU-ref, he will limp on and his position will resemble Thatcher c.1989-1990 or Major 1995-1997.
I don't think Cameron can reattain the love for him of post May 2015. That ship has sailed.
http://show.nojam.com/a2t9/summary.php?b=0
I have to say I was expecting Jack's ARSE to be closer to 60-40. It will be interesting to see if it moves one way or the other as polling day approaches.
Based on JackW's projections for both the referendum result and the turnout, Ladbroke's odds of 5/4 (decimal 2.25) against Remain Wins and Turnout is Less than 65% , therefore appears to offer a reasonable margin of safety in respect of both elements and for me represents an attractive bet, but DYOR.
Cypriot police are reportedly escorting hijacker's ex-wife to Larnaca airport now.
#EgyptAir #MS181
Salmond said once in a generation/lifetime for SINDY. Nobody thought he meant that of a fruit fly.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35915732
Vegans, however, are EVIL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFCAcQxmYDI
When do the candidates get declared as I can't seem to find anything online.
Perhaps we wouldn't be in this position if we had had a referendum every time we gave a bit of our sovereignty away.
But, wasn't the ARSE significantly in error in the margin of the Sindy win for IN? I recollect the ARSE was predicting 60:40. Much more bullish than the actual result.
A similar bias in methodology here could leave the E-indy on a knife-edge.
The ARSE's great triumph was the General Election, not the Sindy.
I don't see how you can sensibly have a Law for Forced Integration. What you can have are lots of small measures which cumulatively make it clear that in Germany you have to live like a German and not as if you are still in your country of origin eg no translation of documents or interpreting services so that you have to speak the language, prosecution of crimes regardless of cultural sensitivities, teaching immigrants about German values, particularly those very different to those in home countries, making leave to remain conditional on good behaviour etc.
There are three essential elements to any good immigration policy:-
1. The consent of the existing population to (a) the need for immigration; (b) the numbers; and ( c) the type of immigrants.
2. Allowing in only those groups and, within the chosen groups, those individuals who are of benefit to the host country. This involves making judgments. Not all of those who want to come to a country are desirable. The Left's big problem is that it seems to think that someone's demand to be let in (especially if it is volubly and emotively expressed) should be the only criterion on which a decision should be based.
3. The ability to remove - effectively - those who arrive illegally and those who break their side of the bargain, by breaking the rules during a probationary period.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/tim-farron-how-liberal-is-the-man-tipped-to-succeed-nick-clegg-as-leader-of-the-lib-dems-10254494.html
How compassionate of him.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/03/28/donald-trump-hires-paul-manafort-to-lead-delegate-effort/?_r=1
RCP has a a look at how demographics will effect the 2016 Presidential.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/03/28/will_demographics_sink_donald_trump_130095.html
The new Morning Consult is noteworthy for two reasons. Trump hits a new all time high, but also Kasich has dropped back down to where he was before. Despite being a three man race I have yet to see much evidence he can get into the 30s, given he struggles to get in the 20s. Of course he is running for VP but it is futile if he can't pick up more support. Some are desperate for him to drop out however they forget his 66 Ohio delegates would then go to Trump.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/morning-consult-24158
Add the losing votes together to find those who weren't.
For you Tories, it worked in reverse, and people thought you were going to continue with Coalition policies.
Roger is an " guerrier Fauteuil" and a "Gauche caviar" as he lives in a chateau in the posh end of France and thus remains totally unaffected by the constant demands he makes for the rest of us here in the Uk.
But their biggest problem is that many of their voters in 2005 and 2010 leant the party their votes as protest against New Labour's policies. They were not instinctive Lib Dem supporters. With Labour moving slowly to the left under Miliband, the Lib Dems would have suffered against a Milibandite Labour even if they had not been in coalition.
However, I am quite hopeful that the Lib Dems are going to slowly recover. Their local election results are nowhere near as bad as they could be, and that's where they should build from.
And they also need to find a political position that is distinct and saleable. And I think there is a market for it. Relying on NOTA is not a sustainable option, as they found out this year.
Blindly blaming the coalition for the party's problems will just lead to more failure.
In comparison, the likes of the Chinese outperform everybody I believe.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35880616
I remember us having similar conversations last spring.
I think it's going to be closer than Jack's ARSE4EU.
I'm on Leave exceeding 47.5%, and am mainly sitting in turnout between 55-60%.
Labour will comfortably win the London mayoral election and they will outperform expectations in the local elections (Scotland will be a disaster for them though).
Are you for leave or remain ?
I doubt leave will be under 40%.
http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/28/11317470/sony-ps4-playstation-4k-rumor
http://www.wsj.com/articles/sony-plans-new-playstation-for-graphics-heavy-games-1459152941
That said, a mid-generation version may be something that sits poorly. It depends whether people view it as they did the slim version of old consoles, or as an upgrade that's essentially better (if the extra bits can be added to an 'old' PS4 with peripherals that would diminish any backlash).
Chopping a prog the political classes listen to as a bloody stump to wave.
However, as time passes events move on, the issue may sink down the agenda again and it may turn out to have been settled after all.
Do you have any idea about New Mexico ? More like Arizona, Texas or Colorado ?
That said, aren't 4K TVs hugely expensive? Not sure I need any more pixels (and I only bought a new TV a couple of years ago).
If it's an extra, that's one thing. But if we end up with 4K-only games [no idea if that'd happen], people would be pissed off.
The other theory is that they are going to have a "double PS4" with a new APU with exactly double the current power of the normal PS4 and sell it for $499/£429 alongside the vanilla PS4 at $299/£249. Games would be made for the base unit and then the "double PS4" would be programmed to use the extra power for higher resolutions or higher framerates. I wouldn't be bothered by that as long as the current unit is the benchmark and the new one is just there for people who want to run at higher resolutions but with no actual advantage in terms of development for a higher spec.
At the moment, I'm not too fussed. If the PS4.5 starts getting games the PS4 can't play, then I'll be annoyed.
Not for a few more moons though ...