It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
What really concerns me is how comfortable Cameron and Osborne are with the socialist part of the EU that the unions and Corbyn hold up as a benefit.
That because the Lib Dem's won, no not their 8 seats ... because they are all in the Tory Party. You would be hard pressed to put a sanded down cigarette paper between Cameron and Clegg on policy, that is why the coalition lasted so long. The Lib Dems are finished because why would you vote for them when you can vote Tory and get the same policies.
The inspiration for the thread came in an offsite conversation with a non Tory PBer
My point (and I'm not a Conservative) is I'm not interested in the petty machinations of the Conservative Party and the EU Referendum is not just about the Conservative Party and its own internal battle for its soul.
The EU Referendum is much more important than to be trivialised down to what's good for your party (or for your chosen faction of your party).
There are plenty of Conservatives on here and elsewhere who seem to see no contradiction in voting LEAVE and being a Conservative and will still be Conservative Party members and supporters whichever side wins and that's fine.
I'm looking forward to the pb thread:
"Why it is in Leave's best interests that Cameron is destroyed"
If you wish to write such a thread, I'll publish it.
Just read the Parris article, about the EU vote being a struggle for the soul of the Conservative Party and I thought so what? 63% of us didn't vote Conservative in 2015, and 63 million of us aren't Party members. Why should all but a few thousand insiders care about the soul of the Conservative Party?
TSE (after heavily flirting with Leave for months) has finally put his cards on the table, so let me put mine.
I care far more about this country, and its prospects of being an independent self-governing nation again, than I do about the Conservative Party. To me, the latter is a means to an end: to advance the politics I feel will give us the brightest future. Just like most normal people.
If wrecking trust in David Cameron, and sacrificing his political career in the process, is what it takes for a majority of this country to Vote Leave, then that's what must be done.
I bear him no malice, it's not personal, but that's politics.
Just got back from 3 hours standing outside a community centre (largely in the rain) in Hart (north-east Hampshire) handing out Vote Leave leaflets. Probably about 200.
Bit mixed.
Most going in/out were in their 30s/40s with young kids.
Three handed the leaflet directly back, all looked very "AB". One old lady harrumphed me about it as she was a firm Remainer, and then tried to sabotage me handing out leaflets by interrupting me for a further minute. Then she left. I had another ask me if I had "permission" to be there, who then disappeared when I pointed out to her it was a public place.
On the plus side, about 80% of people accepted a leaflet, and I saw at least 40% immediately flick through and read it. Some more carried it with them back out again, so hadn't thrown it away. Most people were polite, but a good number weren't not particularly interested and clearly just wanted to get on with their Saturday. A few were very friendly and smilely.
Had conversations with two very firm Leavers, who offered encouragement. Both over 55 I'd say.
Quite a few women saying "I just don't know", "I'm not sure".
It seems to broadly reflect the polls to me. But I'd say 30s/40s more apathetic/unsure.
Well done you, especially for standing in the rain. Were you on your own or in a group?
I must say I'm much more comfortable knocking on doors or delivering than standing in a public place. Kudos!
Thanks mate - I was with one much younger guy too.
I can deal with questions, and have friendly conversations. It's the aggressive or confrontational ones that both embarrass me and knock my confidence. But they are rare.
She said, "For YOUR sake, I hope you LOSE." I said, "For my sake, I hope I win. Have a good day madame."
'Just got back from 3 hours standing outside a community centre (largely in the rain) in Hart (north-east Hampshire) handing out Vote Leave leaflets. Probably about 200.
Bit mixed.
Most going in/out were in their 30s/40s with young kids.'
Not from the Nick Palmer school of canvassing then !
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The optics are terrible for his standing inside the Conservative Party, and it makes him look solidly establishment.
I know my party. Apart from the ultra-loyalists, most will wince.
The inspiration for the thread came in an offsite conversation with a non Tory PBer
My point (and I'm not a Conservative) is I'm not interested in the petty machinations of the Conservative Party and the EU Referendum is not just about the Conservative Party and its own internal battle for its soul.
The EU Referendum is much more important than to be trivialised down to what's good for your party (or for your chosen faction of your party).
There are plenty of Conservatives on here and elsewhere who seem to see no contradiction in voting LEAVE and being a Conservative and will still be Conservative Party members and supporters whichever side wins and that's fine.
I'm looking forward to the pb thread:
"Why it is in Leave's best interests that Cameron is destroyed"
If you wish to write such a thread, I'll publish it.
I'm not sure I do, or that it's correct. But it might be.
The inspiration for the thread came in an offsite conversation with a non Tory PBer
My point (and I'm not a Conservative) is I'm not interested in the petty machinations of the Conservative Party and the EU Referendum is not just about the Conservative Party and its own internal battle for its soul.
The EU Referendum is much more important than to be trivialised down to what's good for your party (or for your chosen faction of your party).
There are plenty of Conservatives on here and elsewhere who seem to see no contradiction in voting LEAVE and being a Conservative and will still be Conservative Party members and supporters whichever side wins and that's fine.
In a nutshell, that is how Matthew Parris sees it. Leave is bad for my faction of the Conservative Party.
'Just got back from 3 hours standing outside a community centre (largely in the rain) in Hart (north-east Hampshire) handing out Vote Leave leaflets. Probably about 200.
Bit mixed.
Most going in/out were in their 30s/40s with young kids.'
Not from the Nick Palmer school of canvassing then !
My problem is I'm too honest, and wear my heart on my sleeve. It also means I can be sensitive and emotional.
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The Three EU Stooges photo is indelible and disastrous. As you well know.
The inspiration for the thread came in an offsite conversation with a non Tory PBer
My point (and I'm not a Conservative) is I'm not interested in the petty machinations of the Conservative Party and the EU Referendum is not just about the Conservative Party and its own internal battle for its soul.
The EU Referendum is much more important than to be trivialised down to what's good for your party (or for your chosen faction of your party).
There are plenty of Conservatives on here and elsewhere who seem to see no contradiction in voting LEAVE and being a Conservative and will still be Conservative Party members and supporters whichever side wins and that's fine.
In a nutshell, that is how Matthew Parris sees it. Leave is bad for my faction of the Conservative Party.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
I visit rarely now and post less. Good on you for bothering but you're wasting your time being sensible on here with this issue.
Just got back from 3 hours standing outside a community centre (largely in the rain) in Hart (north-east Hampshire) handing out Vote Leave leaflets. Probably about 200.
Bit mixed.
Most going in/out were in their 30s/40s with young kids.
Three handed the leaflet directly back, all looked very "AB". One old lady harrumphed me about it as she was a firm Remainer, and then tried to sabotage me handing out leaflets by interrupting me for a further minute. Then she left. I had another ask me if I had "permission" to be there, who then disappeared when I pointed out to her it was a public place.
On the plus side, about 80% of people accepted a leaflet, and I saw at least 40% immediately flick through and read it. Some more carried it with them back out again, so hadn't thrown it away. Most people were polite, but a good number weren't not particularly interested and clearly just wanted to get on with their Saturday. A few were very friendly and smilely.
Had conversations with two very firm Leavers, who offered encouragement. Both over 55 I'd say.
Quite a few women saying "I just don't know", "I'm not sure".
It seems to broadly reflect the polls to me. But I'd say 30s/40s more apathetic/unsure.
Well done you, especially for standing in the rain. Were you on your own or in a group?
I must say I'm much more comfortable knocking on doors or delivering than standing in a public place. Kudos!
Thanks mate - I was with one much younger guy too.
I can deal with questions, and have friendly conversations. It's the aggressive or confrontational ones that both embarrass me and knock my confidence. But they are rare.
She said, "For YOUR sake, I hope you LOSE." I said, "For my sake, I hope I win. Have a good day madame."
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The optics are terrible for his standing inside the Conservative Party, and it makes him look solidly establishment.
I know my party. Apart from the ultra-loyalists, most will wince.
True Tories will echo Thatcher's famous response " No, No, No. " at the sight of team Kinnock, Ashdown and Cameron.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Given the latest polls show Trump winning NY by 20 points or more and Cruz a poor third the momentum could swing back to the Donald when New York votes on Tuesday
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
Can Leave critique anything that Remain do without being accused of "frothing" ?
Major did the right thing by Northern Ireland, and I supported him at the time despite my youth. You could make a similar criticism over Thatcher and the Anglo-Irish agreement.
The same people can quite reasonably reach different conclusions on different issues when it comes to the national interest.
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The optics are terrible for his standing inside the Conservative Party, and it makes him look solidly establishment.
I know my party. Apart from the ultra-loyalists, most will wince.
Strange isn't it? Ashdown is a former soldier, Kinnock a working-class lad who hauled himself up by his bootstraps. In any other context the Leave tendency would side with such people against privileged posh-boy Dave. Now they're merely establishment chancers who no Tory should be seen dead with. The Cause defines you.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Leave only have to be lucky once, Remain has to be lucky every time.
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The Three EU Stooges photo is indelible and disastrous. As you well know.
Not as disastrous as The Three Leave Stooges Galloway , IDS and Farage
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The optics are terrible for his standing inside the Conservative Party, and it makes him look solidly establishment.
I know my party. Apart from the ultra-loyalists, most will wince.
The Cause defines you.
Speaks a man who's altered his profile picture to the Flag of the European Union.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Leave only have to be lucky once, Remain has to be lucky every time.
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The optics are terrible for his standing inside the Conservative Party, and it makes him look solidly establishment.
I know my party. Apart from the ultra-loyalists, most will wince.
I'll take your word for it. If there was ever a group who were solidly establishment I'd assume it was the Tory party. Heck, I'd have thought it would be a point of pride.
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
Remainers are the young, the posh and the Establishment. The latter are generally the ones who consider themselves to be setters of opinion by right because they know best, hence the slightly sneering tone at times. Not a good look.
Cameron is an excellent politician because he has very few principles. Fearing losing the GE, he allowed a referendum despite being an ardent Europhile. A principled man would have refused.
Jezza is a man of principle. Unfortunately he's also a loon with lunatic principles. Of the establishment, but not part of it. He's also a poor politician and is thus unelectable.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
I visit rarely now and post less. Good on you for bothering but you're wasting your time being sensible on here with this issue.
(1) agreeing with everything the Remain campaign do whenever criticised by Leavers a sensible person (2) calling any Leaver a frother when they criticise any Remainer a sensible post
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Quite how you infer that from what I wrote is beyond me. I'll be kind and assume you've just woken up. If not I suggest adult literary classes.
I still can't quite get over Remain's patronising campaign here - copied from Obama, but without any Hope & Change
The campaign Talk to Gran was launched this week, urging the young to persuade the old via a series of rather patronising postcards. One reads: “Nan, let’s sit down for a cuppa, a slice of Battenberg . . . and a chat about why my future’s in the EU.”
Mr. Meeks, you're hardly a plebeian yourself. On the geographical front, you seem more pro-migrant than the average for the populations of both countries in which you own homes.
Mr. F, Cameron's entirely responsible for his loss of standing. He's acted with a mixture of arrogance, complacency and incompetence in recent months.
Edited extra bit: the reply to Mr. Meeks was perhaps ill-tempered. But sneering is not an endearing approach.
Mr. Meeks (2), the EU and US situations are radically different. The comparison is ridiculous.
I don't take kindly to my personal circumstances being used as debating points to attempt to disqualify me from having a view. A sneer in return is the least that is merited.
Is amusing, if you're wealthy and elite, we're not allowed to discuss matters of immigration because we don't live in the real world.
But the plebs of PB are allowed to talk about how international trade agreements will happen, despite them have no qualifications to talk about such things.
I love it.
''PB Plebs''
Nice.
Elsewhere the tumbrel wheels are being greased.......
Oh! "Tumbrel" that's my new word for the day, it's always an education here !
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Quite how you infer that from what I wrote is beyond me. I'll be kind and assume you've just woken up. If not I suggest adult literary classes.
Let's start from the point of view that it takes a lot to be happy for your party's leader to be photographed with the royalty of your opponents. Perhaps the Northern Ireland peace process meets the criteria, perhaps it doesn't. I'm not sure too many Tories will accept that this referendum meets the criteria.
That said I'm not a Tory, it's private grief and I shouldn't intrude.
Freedom of movement for qualified, useful people that will contribute to society from anywhere in the world, for criminals, terrorist supporters and spongers, not so much... or as it is known in Canada and Australia, a points based system.
The 2 Glasgow airport bombers were respectively a doctor and an PHD engineering student (though the former was in fact UK born). Not simple to winnow out the contributors from the 'criminals, terrorist supporters and spongers'.
The 7/7, Brussels and Paris terrorists were also not migrants. Even the 9/11 terrorists had legitimate study visas to be in the USA.
Yes yes... so what is your point, that because we can't make a system perfect we shouldn't make it better ? Would like you like to bet if the 9/11 terrorists could get a study visa to the USA now, under the current regime ? Or is it because something about controlling who comes into the country offends your liberal values you are waving your hands around.
No, I am entirely in favour of reducing migration from places where jihadists roam, and restricting spouse and family settlement, and an active deportation policy are all part of that.
Oh, I thought you were in favour of freedom of movement.
Houdini would struggle with the knots you tie yourself in.
Remainers are the young, the posh and the Establishment. The latter are generally the ones who consider themselves to be setters of opinion by right because they know best, hence the slightly sneering tone at times. Not a good look.
Cameron is an excellent politician because he has very few principles. Fearing losing the GE, he allowed a referendum despite being an ardent Europhile. A principled man would have refused.
Jezza is a man of principle. Unfortunately he's also a loon with lunatic principles. Of the establishment, but not part of it. He's also a poor politician and is thus unelectable.
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The Three EU Stooges photo is indelible and disastrous. As you well know.
Not as disastrous as The Three Leave Stooges Galloway , IDS and Farage
At least Gorgeous George didn't shout out "WE'RE AAALLLLLRRRRRIIIIIGGGGHHHHTTTT!" at that rally Sheffield in 1992.
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
The flaw in that analysis is that in most elections the public get offered essentially the same policies by both parties, with slightly different window dressing. So the election is largely decided on the perception of competence, or because the public are fed up with seeing the same faces on the TV. Rewarding competence and looking the part, has it's place of course, but it would be a stretch to see that as approval of any or all of the party's policy platform.
I have just read the take down of The Donald's claim he has given $100m to charity, when the real figure is $2m. Again his would normally be terrible for some bodies campaign, but not The Donald!!!
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Leave only have to be lucky once, Remain has to be lucky every time.
"Cameron is the biggest bastard we have ever known!" - apologies to Danny Morrison.
Remainers are the young, the posh and the Establishment. The latter are generally the ones who consider themselves to be setters of opinion by right because they know best, hence the slightly sneering tone at times. Not a good look.
Cameron is an excellent politician because he has very few principles. Fearing losing the GE, he allowed a referendum despite being an ardent Europhile. A principled man would have refused.
Jezza is a man of principle. Unfortunately he's also a loon with lunatic principles. Of the establishment, but not part of it. He's also a poor politician and is thus unelectable.
@Casino_Royale 'Just got back from 3 hours standing outside a community centre (largely in the rain) in Hart (north-east Hampshire) handing out Vote Leave leaflets. Probably about 200. Bit mixed. Most going in/out were in their 30s/40s with young kids.'
Not from the Nick Palmer school of canvassing then !
We should expect those in their 30/40s in an affluent area (ABC1) to break in favour of REMAIN. Probably 55/45. If however, they are 50/50 or better for LEAVE, then that is a positive sign for LEAVE.
I still can't quite get over Remain's patronising campaign here - copied from Obama, but without any Hope & Change
The campaign Talk to Gran was launched this week, urging the young to persuade the old via a series of rather patronising postcards. One reads: “Nan, let’s sit down for a cuppa, a slice of Battenberg . . . and a chat about why my future’s in the EU.”
Mr. Meeks, you're hardly a plebeian yourself. On the geographical front, you seem more pro-migrant than the average for the populations of both countries in which you own homes.
Mr. F, Cameron's entirely responsible for his loss of standing. He's acted with a mixture of arrogance, complacency and incompetence in recent months.
Edited extra bit: the reply to Mr. Meeks was perhaps ill-tempered. But sneering is not an endearing approach.
Mr. Meeks (2), the EU and US situations are radically different. The comparison is ridiculous.
I don't take kindly to my personal circumstances being used as debating points to attempt to disqualify me from having a view. A sneer in return is the least that is merited.
Is amusing, if you're wealthy and elite, we're not allowed to discuss matters of immigration because we don't live in the real world.
But the plebs of PB are allowed to talk about how international trade agreements will happen, despite them have no qualifications to talk about such things.
I love it.
''PB Plebs''
Nice.
Elsewhere the tumbrel wheels are being greased.......
Oh! "Tumbrel" that's my new word for the day, it's always an education here !
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
------------------------------------------- Gran should change her will and give it all to the cat's protection league.
I still can't quite get over Remain's patronising campaign here - copied from Obama, but without any Hope & Change
The campaign Talk to Gran was launched this week, urging the young to persuade the old via a series of rather patronising postcards. One reads: “Nan, let’s sit down for a cuppa, a slice of Battenberg . . . and a chat about why my future’s in the EU.”
Mr. Meeks, you're hardly a plebeian yourself. On the geographical front, you seem more pro-migrant than the average for the populations of both countries in which you own homes.
Mr. F, Cameron's entirely responsible for his loss of standing. He's acted with a mixture of arrogance, complacency and incompetence in recent months.
Edited extra bit: the reply to Mr. Meeks was perhaps ill-tempered. But sneering is not an endearing approach.
Mr. Meeks (2), the EU and US situations are radically different. The comparison is ridiculous.
I don't take kindly to my personal circumstances being used as debating points to attempt to disqualify me from having a view. A sneer in return is the least that is merited.
Is amusing, if you're wealthy and elite, we're not allowed to discuss matters of immigration because we don't live in the real world.
But the plebs of PB are allowed to talk about how international trade agreements will happen, despite them have no qualifications to talk about such things.
I love it.
''PB Plebs''
Nice.
Elsewhere the tumbrel wheels are being greased.......
Oh! "Tumbrel" that's my new word for the day, it's always an education here !
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
Gran should change her will and give it all to the cat's protection league.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
Would you say it is worse than Leave introducing George Galloway as the special guest at a rally ?
In the EU referendum context; yes. Not only that, it was the GO faction of leavers that produced Galloway; the Leave faction had nothing to do with it.
I myself would have preferred that Galloway was long gone and buried in a long forgotten corner.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Quite how you infer that from what I wrote is beyond me. I'll be kind and assume you've just woken up. If not I suggest adult literary classes.
Let's start from the point of view that it takes a lot to be happy for your party's leader to be photographed with the royalty of your opponents. Perhaps the Northern Ireland peace process meets the criteria, perhaps it doesn't. I'm not sure too many Tories will accept that this referendum meets the criteria.
That said I'm not a Tory, it's private grief and I shouldn't intrude.
Oh I don't know. Dave lived to fight another day on the occasion it happened before:
Wasn't there a campaign (advert at least) in the Irish referendum on gay marriage all about 'take your family with you', with young people asking older people to come with them on this journey? I wonder if this 'write to gran' is supposed to be similar, but it has a lot less emotional resonance.
For the avoidance of doubt, I will vote Leave. It's nothing to do with the economics or immigrations - it's a grudge I've borne for over forty years. I was lied to in 1975 (both overtly and by being economical with the truth). Being only in my mid-twenties then, I assumed established politicians did not deliberately tell bare-faced lies.
Perhaps the old gits should sit the young 'uns down and tell them that the Establishment does lie, often and openly.
It’s a photo of the establishment doing what the establishment does best: coalescing around a policy and convincing people that it would be sheer madness to oppose it. Government by social convention.
To some extent it’s a damning indictment of bourgeois democracy, of the way that those with power and privilege get to define what is politically acceptable and assert an unwritten consensus. A consensus that’s inescapable.
There is, however, a surprising consequence to the Remain campaign’s strategy of collecting celebrity endorsements like they were advertising walk-in baths. They’re creating a campaign of personalities rather than ideas. They’re trying to compel Britain to vote in a particular way rather than persuade them. And stubborn voters might not appreciate that.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/15/the-eu-referendum-is-becoming-a-contest-between-the-establishmen/
I'm beginning to think that Leave might win this.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
You make it sounds as if Cameron was pictured alongside fringe Nazis. I never liked either Kinnock or Ashdown, but they were long-term leaders of major British political parties, and remain highly respected by those parties' supporters. Sadly, Leave really are starting to conform to their opponents' stereotype of them: that anyone who doubts Leave's cause must be a buffoon or a traitor. It's an unappealing look.
The Three EU Stooges photo is indelible and disastrous. As you well know.
Not as disastrous as The Three Leave Stooges Galloway , IDS and Farage
At least Gorgeous George didn't shout out "WE'RE AAALLLLLRRRRRIIIIIGGGGHHHHTTTT!" at that rally Sheffield in 1992.
That one picture has done more than anything to turn me against Cameron.
I think it's a terrible mistake.
Would you say it is worse than Leave introducing George Galloway as the special guest at a rally ?
In the EU referendum context; yes. Not only that, it was the GO faction of leavers that produced Galloway; the Leave faction had nothing to do with it.
I myself would have preferred that Galloway was long gone and buried in a long forgotten corner.
"Some corner of a foreign field - that is fornever England"
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
The flaw in that analysis is that in most elections the public get offered essentially the same policies by both parties, with slightly different window dressing. So the election is largely decided on the perception of competence, or because the public are fed up with seeing the same faces on the TV. Rewarding competence and looking the part, has it's place of course, but it would be a stretch to see that as approval of any or all of the party's policy platform.
That isn't a flaw in my analysis, it's the whole point - the reason they offer us essentially the same with different window dressing is they've established that's what has worked (and though turnout is down from historic levels, it has gone up three times in a row). I don't say it will last forever, and maybe we are at the tipping point, or approaching it, but there's a reason they've been offering us pablum, and it's because they think we like it, or accept it at any rate, and so far we have. When it no longer works, they will shift pretty rapidly. Indeed, that may be what Labour is trying right now, and it's a question of if they've jumped too soon or people still want the same old shower delivered by the most competent.
Wasn't there a campaign (advert at least) in the Irish referendum on gay marriage all about 'take your family with you', with young people asking older people to come with them on this journey? I wonder if this 'write to gran' is supposed to be similar, but it has a lot less emotional resonance.
The staunch Remainer who harangued/tried to sabotage me today was a Gran: an old lady in her early 80s.
People never cease to surprise you, and you can't make assumptions.
For the avoidance of doubt, I will vote Leave. It's nothing to do with the economics or immigrations - it's a grudge I've borne for over forty years. I was lied to in 1975 (both overtly and by being economical with the truth). Being only in my mid-twenties then, I assumed established politicians did not deliberately tell bare-faced lies.
Perhaps the old gits should sit the young 'uns down and tell them that the Establishment does lie, often and openly.
"I always lie - in fact, I am lying to you now!" - Harry Mudd.
Wasn't there a campaign (advert at least) in the Irish referendum on gay marriage all about 'take your family with you', with young people asking older people to come with them on this journey? I wonder if this 'write to gran' is supposed to be similar, but it has a lot less emotional resonance.
Good point. The 'Talk to Gran' thing (or whatever it's called) is clearly just a bit tongue in cheek. I imagine its main purpose is to remind the nation's pro-EU yoof that much of the older generation thinks otherwise, and therefore they'll need to get out of bed and to the polling station if they want to counter these old farts. But emphasizing this point in an optimistic and non-divisive way.
Wasn't there a campaign (advert at least) in the Irish referendum on gay marriage all about 'take your family with you', with young people asking older people to come with them on this journey? I wonder if this 'write to gran' is supposed to be similar, but it has a lot less emotional resonance.
The staunch Remainer who harangued/tried to sabotage me today was a Gran: an old lady in her early 80s.
People never cease to surprise you, and you can't make assumptions.
I still can't quite get over Remain's patronising campaign here - copied from Obama, but without any Hope & Change
The campaign Talk to Gran was launched this week, urging the young to persuade the old via a series of rather patronising postcards. One reads: “Nan, let’s sit down for a cuppa, a slice of Battenberg . . . and a chat about why my future’s in the EU.”
Mr. Meeks, you're hardly a plebeian yourself. On the geographical front, you seem more pro-migrant than the average for the populations of both countries in which you own homes.
Mr. F, Cameron's entirely responsible for his loss of standing. He's acted with a mixture of arrogance, complacency and incompetence in recent months.
Edited extra bit: the reply to Mr. Meeks was perhaps ill-tempered. But sneering is not an endearing approach.
Mr. Meeks (2), the EU and US situations are radically different. The comparison is ridiculous.
I don't take kindly to my personal circumstances being used as debating points to attempt to disqualify me from having a view. A sneer in return is the least that is merited.
Is amusing, if you're wealthy and elite, we're not allowed to discuss matters of immigration because we don't live in the real world.
But the plebs of PB are allowed to talk about how international trade agreements will happen, despite them have no qualifications to talk about such things.
I love it.
''PB Plebs''
Nice.
Elsewhere the tumbrel wheels are being greased.......
Oh! "Tumbrel" that's my new word for the day, it's always an education here !
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
------------------------------------------- Gran should change her will and give it all to the cat's protection league.
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
I think one of the postcards BSE have made says something along the lines of, "I know I havn't talked to you in ages but I think you should vote to remain in the EU". I would imagine that would only serve to piss the grandparents off even more and do the opposite of what they are being asked to do.
"Why King Charles III will be the biggest disaster to hit the British monarchy since Charles I"
A little unfair on old Charles. A lot of the smaller places not already getting rid of the crown may well take the opportunity to do so upon his accession, but it isn't really much to do with him, but more perhaps they would have already done it had the Queen not been in place, and for many it's not worth causing a fuss until there is a change incoming.
Jamaica is probably worried as they've only just realised the Queen is immortal.
Wasn't there a campaign (advert at least) in the Irish referendum on gay marriage all about 'take your family with you', with young people asking older people to come with them on this journey? I wonder if this 'write to gran' is supposed to be similar, but it has a lot less emotional resonance.
The staunch Remainer who harangued/tried to sabotage me today was a Gran: an old lady in her early 80s.
People never cease to surprise you, and you can't make assumptions.
No fool like an old fool.
Some Remainers can be just as rude in public as they are on here.
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
I think one of the postcards BSE have made says something along the lines of, "I know I havn't talked to you in ages but I think you should vote to remain in the EU". I would imagine that would only serve to piss the grandparents off even more and do the opposite of what they are being asked to do.
Yes, it was something like that. Hideously misconceived.
“We have already trialled these postcards at a number of the universities, where they have been shifted like hot cakes. So when young people next share a slice of cake and a cup of tea with their gran, they can tell them proudly that the positive, progressive and patriotic choice is to vote to remain.”
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
I think one of the postcards BSE have made says something along the lines of, "I know I havn't talked to you in ages but I think you should vote to remain in the EU". I would imagine that would only serve to piss the grandparents off even more and do the opposite of what they are being asked to do.
If any PBers do get a postcard from a grandchild about the EU, I hope they feel willing the share the details, I think analysing the wording of such a card would be hilarious.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Leave only have to be lucky once, Remain has to be lucky every time.
Very good.
If Remain wins we'll be saying post referendum about Leavers 'They haven't gone away you know'
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
The flaw in that analysis is that in most elections the public get offered essentially the same policies by both parties, with slightly different window dressing. So the election is largely decided on the perception of competence, or because the public are fed up with seeing the same faces on the TV. Rewarding competence and looking the part, has it's place of course, but it would be a stretch to see that as approval of any or all of the party's policy platform.
That isn't a flaw in my analysis, it's the whole point - the reason they offer us essentially the same with different window dressing is they've established that's what has worked (and though turnout is down from historic levels, it has gone up three times in a row). I don't say it will last forever, and maybe we are at the tipping point, or approaching it, but there's a reason they've been offering us pablum, and it's because they think we like it, or accept it at any rate, and so far we have. When it no longer works, they will shift pretty rapidly. Indeed, that may be what Labour is trying right now, and it's a question of if they've jumped too soon or people still want the same old shower delivered by the most competent.
I couldn't disagree more. Big Government, nanny state, creeping surveillance, EU, bank bail outs, following the US into every war - it's not an electorate-pleasing agenda, it's a powerful interest serving agenda. The electorate simply hasn't had a choice, and arguably still doesn't.
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Leave only have to be lucky once, Remain has to be lucky every time.
Very good.
If Remain wins we'll be saying post referendum about Leavers 'They haven't gone away you know'
Leave's frothing over the Cameron/Ashowdown/Kinnock photo is in sad contrast to when Blair and Major jointly fronted the Northern Ireland peace process. No one could accuse Major of liking the IRA (who'd tried to murder him) or Blair (who'd politically humiliated him), but he put that aside for what he believed was in the national interest. Not everyone (me included) thought the process would succeed, but no one questioned Major's wisdom or motives. We lived in more nuanced and understanding times back then. Now everything must be absolute.
You're comparing those of us wanting the UK to leave the EU to IRA terrorists?
Leave only have to be lucky once, Remain has to be lucky every time.
Very good.
If Remain wins we'll be saying post referendum about Leavers 'They haven't gone away you know'
Livingstone has threatened to go away. Hope so.
It's only a matter of time before Shrieky Meeky threatens to desert the UK for Hungary.
I read your piece in the Speccy. Enjoyed it very much. I don't agree with the conclusion (though I felt you were slightly tongue in cheek) because I don't think Europe can afford to turn away or heavily surcharge Chinese and Indian tourists. It's one of the few ways we have of getting a bit of the money we've spent back. I think instead we must find inventive ways of spreading the benefits of tourism to less developed (and prosperous) areas.
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
The flaw in that analysis is that in most elections the public get offered essentially the same policies by both parties, with slightly different window dressing. So the election is largely decided on the perception of competence, or because the public are fed up with seeing the same faces on the TV. Rewarding competence and looking the part, has it's place of course, but it would be a stretch to see that as approval of any or all of the party's policy platform.
That isn't a flaw in my analysis, it's the whole point - the reason they offer us essentially the same with different window dressing is they've established that's what has worked (and though turnout is down from historic levels, it has gone up three times in a row). I don't say it will last forever, and maybe we are at the tipping point, or approaching it, but there's a reason they've been offering us pablum, and it's because they think we like it, or accept it at any rate, and so far we have. When it no longer works, they will shift pretty rapidly. Indeed, that may be what Labour is trying right now, and it's a question of if they've jumped too soon or people still want the same old shower delivered by the most competent.
I couldn't disagree more. Big Government, nanny state, creeping surveillance, EU, bank bail outs, following the US into every war - it's not an electorate-pleasing agenda, it's a powerful interest serving agenda. The electorate simply hasn't had a choice, and arguably still doesn't.
Except nothing is stopping someone from offering us an agenda that is the opposite, nothing is preventing someone from offering us that choice and if we hate that agenda so much they will do well. To some degree this has been happening with the likes of UKIP. But it hasn't stopped the big two from winning while serving up that same agenda. Yet.
If the same old agenda continues to win people are still content enough for the time being. Saying we haven't been offered a choice does not hold water with me, because nothing stops the parties from offering us a different choice, and if their voters were not mostly content with that they would offer us something else.
Until we demand different, they won't offer us anything different.
Not sure if this has been mentioned on here, but what a striking example of how the EU has got its tentacles into almost every corner of our national life, and the extent to which the UK public sector in particular has become so entwined with it.
'Over Half Of Electoral Commission Committee Members Have EU Conflicts Of Interest'
If any PBers do get a postcard from a grandchild about the EU, I hope they feel willing the share the details, I think analysing the wording of such a card would be hilarious.
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
The flaw in that analysis is that in most elections the public get offered essentially the same policies by both parties, with slightly different window dressing. So the election is largely decided on the perception of competence, or because the public are fed up with seeing the same faces on the TV. Rewarding competence and looking the part, has it's place of course, but it would be a stretch to see that as approval of any or all of the party's policy platform.
That isn't a flaw in my analysis, it's the whole point - the reason they offer us essentially the same with different window dressing is they've established that's what has worked (and though turnout is down from historic levels, it has gone up three times in a row). I don't say it will last forever, and maybe we are at the tipping point, or approaching it, but there's a reason they've been offering us pablum, and it's because they think we like it, or accept it at any rate, and so far we have. When it no longer works, they will shift pretty rapidly. Indeed, that may be what Labour is trying right now, and it's a question of if they've jumped too soon or people still want the same old shower delivered by the most competent.
I couldn't disagree more. Big Government, nanny state, creeping surveillance, EU, bank bail outs, following the US into every war - it's not an electorate-pleasing agenda, it's a powerful interest serving agenda. The electorate simply hasn't had a choice, and arguably still doesn't.
Except nothing is stopping someone from offering us an agenda that is the opposite, nothing is preventing someone from offering us that choice and if we hate that agenda so much they will do well. To some degree this has been happening with the likes of UKIP. But it hasn't stopped the big two from winning while serving up that same agenda. Yet.
If the same old agenda continues to win people are still content enough for the time being. Saying we haven't been offered a choice does not hold water with me, because nothing stops the parties from offering us a different choice, and if their voters were not mostly content with that they would offer us something else.
Until we demand different, they won't offer us anything different.
If any PBers do get a postcard from a grandchild about the EU, I hope they feel willing the share the details, I think analysing the wording of such a card would be hilarious.
There's another campaign out for people from the continent to 'Hug a Brit' to get us to stay in as well. I make no comment.
Except nothing is stopping someone from offering us an agenda that is the opposite, nothing is preventing someone from offering us that choice and if we hate that agenda so much they will do well. To some degree this has been happening with the likes of UKIP. But it hasn't stopped the big two from winning while serving up that same agenda. Yet.
If the same old agenda continues to win people are still content enough for the time being. Saying we haven't been offered a choice does not hold water with me, because nothing stops the parties from offering us a different choice, and if their voters were not mostly content with that they would offer us something else.
Until we demand different, they won't offer us anything different.
Small parties offering something fresh are not going to make a difference in the UK all the while we have FPTP.
a) Most voters are not going to vote for a party they don't think has a chance of winning. That came out very clearly in the last election. Also 30% in a survey in The Guardian said they would consider voting for UKIP if they thought they could win, but they didn't think that, so they didn't vote for them.
b) Both big parties play the "if you vote for the small party the big bad boogeyman will get you" game, even when that boogeyman is offering more of less what they are, but enough voters believe it that they are not going to risk a vote for the small party if they think it will split the vote and let the boogeyman in.
So the big two can carry on offering us the same dishonest and largely unpopular crap, pretty few people are enthusiastic about voting for either big party, they just select the least worst.
If any PBers do get a postcard from a grandchild about the EU, I hope they feel willing the share the details, I think analysing the wording of such a card would be hilarious.
There's another campaign out for people from the continent to 'Hug a Brit' to get us to stay in as well. I make no comment.
I see many barriers to insurgent parties, and I think UKIP in particularly have done about as well as could be expected. But my point is not so much about insurgent parties but what 'the establishment' offers. If discontentment with the bland, samey offering of the big two (formerly the big 2.5) was bad enough it would, even with the barriers to insurgent parties, start costing them, and they would change their offerings accordingly in order to combat those insurgent parties.
Labour members seem to feel the time to change their offering has come, to be even more distinct than before even if it means being labelled by some as extreme. We shall see in a few years if that is the case, and they are rewarded for striking a different tone.
Meanwhile, we know the Tories offered a referendum because of insurgent attitudes on the EU, and so they changed their position. If dissatisfaction in other areas rises, they too will change things up.
If any PBers do get a postcard from a grandchild about the EU, I hope they feel willing the share the details, I think analysing the wording of such a card would be hilarious.
There's another campaign out for people from the continent to 'Hug a Brit' to get us to stay in as well. I make no comment.
LOL. That will work. Brits have probably the largest personal space of any of the 27 nations, so fellow Europeans are being encouraged to invade it That will persuade us, but not perhaps in the manner intended.
If any PBers do get a postcard from a grandchild about the EU, I hope they feel willing the share the details, I think analysing the wording of such a card would be hilarious.
There's another campaign out for people from the continent to 'Hug a Brit' to get us to stay in as well. I make no comment.
You what? With our famously less touchy feely mannerisms? What silliness. As MTimT says, our personal space considerations are quite large.
Comments
I care far more about this country, and its prospects of being an independent self-governing nation again, than I do about the Conservative Party. To me, the latter is a means to an end: to advance the politics I feel will give us the brightest future. Just like most normal people.
If wrecking trust in David Cameron, and sacrificing his political career in the process, is what it takes for a majority of this country to Vote Leave, then that's what must be done.
I bear him no malice, it's not personal, but that's politics.
I can deal with questions, and have friendly conversations. It's the aggressive or confrontational ones that both embarrass me and knock my confidence. But they are rare.
She said, "For YOUR sake, I hope you LOSE." I said, "For my sake, I hope I win. Have a good day madame."
But it depressed me for a good ten minutes after!
'Just got back from 3 hours standing outside a community centre (largely in the rain) in Hart (north-east Hampshire) handing out Vote Leave leaflets. Probably about 200.
Bit mixed.
Most going in/out were in their 30s/40s with young kids.'
Not from the Nick Palmer school of canvassing then !
I know my party. Apart from the ultra-loyalists, most will wince.
Also, I'm undecided but at risk of making umpteen bets. Hmm. I may need to reduce my stakes.
Thank you for offering.
I could never be a politician.
Re Cameron, our country is worth much more than his Wikipedia entry. Blair was king once too
Major did the right thing by Northern Ireland, and I supported him at the time despite my youth. You could make a similar criticism over Thatcher and the Anglo-Irish agreement.
The same people can quite reasonably reach different conclusions on different issues when it comes to the national interest.
But then I find railing against 'the establishment' quite overblown much of the time, since one of the reasons are politicians have condensed around many samey positions and backgrounds is because that's what we the public have, to date, rewarded electorally. Won't always be that way, maybe things are changing, but they wouldn't be the way they are if it hadn't worked, to date.
Leavers are the poor, the old and the common.
Remainers are the young, the posh and the Establishment. The latter are generally the ones who consider themselves to be setters of opinion by right because they know best, hence the slightly sneering tone at times. Not a good look.
Cameron is an excellent politician because he has very few principles. Fearing losing the GE, he allowed a referendum despite being an ardent Europhile. A principled man would have refused.
Jezza is a man of principle. Unfortunately he's also a loon with lunatic principles. Of the establishment, but not part of it. He's also a poor politician and is thus unelectable.
Can I have my PPE degree now, please?
So Joey Essex, net worth £6.6 million, is part of the elite but a professor at Oxford from a modest background is not
(1) agreeing with everything the Remain campaign do whenever criticised by Leavers a sensible person
(2) calling any Leaver a frother when they criticise any Remainer a sensible post
You are right - it's unbelievably patronising. Gran should reply about having a chat about the wisdom that comes with age!
That said I'm not a Tory, it's private grief and I shouldn't intrude.
Houdini would struggle with the knots you tie yourself in.
-------------------------------------------
Gran should change her will and give it all to the cat's protection league.
*Edit -what is it with the quote function today?
Betting PostF1: you'll never guess how many tips I offer in my pre-race piece:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2016/04/china-pre-race-2016.html
Unless you guess the number three, obviously.
LOL
I myself would have preferred that Galloway was long gone and buried in a long forgotten corner.
http://tinyurl.com/gtmt99b
Perhaps the old gits should sit the young 'uns down and tell them that the Establishment does lie, often and openly.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3543228/Jamaica-announces-plans-axe-Queen-official-Head-State-eve-90th-birthday-replace-president.html
People never cease to surprise you, and you can't make assumptions.
"Why King Charles III will be the biggest disaster to hit the British monarchy since Charles I"
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20110628/lead/lead1.html
https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/720936045982924800
He should apply for a job with Sir Crosby, that message will get Labour supporters flocking to back the elite Remainers.
"I always lie - in fact, I am lying to you now!" - Harry Mudd."
An old paradox but a good one.
Jamaica is probably worried as they've only just realised the Queen is immortal.
A cat just walked over your keyboard.
https://twitter.com/BeLeaveBritain
http://youtu.be/9dNFDKq6ly4
http://tinyurl.com/jsshlft
If the same old agenda continues to win people are still content enough for the time being. Saying we haven't been offered a choice does not hold water with me, because nothing stops the parties from offering us a different choice, and if their voters were not mostly content with that they would offer us something else.
Until we demand different, they won't offer us anything different.
'Over Half Of Electoral Commission Committee Members Have EU Conflicts Of Interest'
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/04/14/exclusive-half-electoral-commission-committee-members-eu-conflicts-interest/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/04/16/spains-shining-economic-recovery-or-how-the-eurozone-defines-success-down/#4b3c728c11c9
a) Most voters are not going to vote for a party they don't think has a chance of winning. That came out very clearly in the last election. Also 30% in a survey in The Guardian said they would consider voting for UKIP if they thought they could win, but they didn't think that, so they didn't vote for them.
b) Both big parties play the "if you vote for the small party the big bad boogeyman will get you" game, even when that boogeyman is offering more of less what they are, but enough voters believe it that they are not going to risk a vote for the small party if they think it will split the vote and let the boogeyman in.
So the big two can carry on offering us the same dishonest and largely unpopular crap, pretty few people are enthusiastic about voting for either big party, they just select the least worst.
It's all aimed at the wrong audience using values of the message deliverers. Like pandering to Jehovah Witnesses on doorstep strategy.
Labour members seem to feel the time to change their offering has come, to be even more distinct than before even if it means being labelled by some as extreme. We shall see in a few years if that is the case, and they are rewarded for striking a different tone.
Meanwhile, we know the Tories offered a referendum because of insurgent attitudes on the EU, and so they changed their position. If dissatisfaction in other areas rises, they too will change things up.