If I was David Cameron I would announce that I will stay in Office for three months post the referendum and then let the conservative party self destruct as that is what is going to happen if the extreme Brexit have their way. No matter that Corbyn is leader of labour the conservatives will not get another majority for years as it breaks in two, and loses my membership and many others in the process
It will not happen Big G. The conservative party will always survive as a governing party with FPTP.
Only if the party pulls itself together, a move to the right would be a big mistake
Possibly but there will be a space to move to the right, with no real political consequences.
But the party has to unite and the rebels need to come on board
Governor Gary Johnson has just won the Libertarian Party Nomination for President!
www.garyjohnson2016.com
Ok this was the expected result, so no big news, but so far there have been 4 opinion poles that have included his name and all 4 have him at 10% or more. Now he has formaly won the nomination, I think there will be more poles conducted with his name on. The interest from that could feed back an put him over 15% and get him in the debates. if so he could, as a relatively unknown quantity, beat expectations, as Nick Clegg did in the 2010 debates in the UK.
On election day he does not need to win 50% of voters, he does not even need to win more voters that the over partys, all he needs to do is win sufishent number of states to, deny the other 2 of 270 Electrale Collage Votes, and then it goes to the US House of Representatives.
The House of Reps is curently Republican led, but there are 40-80 liberty minded republican reps who I think would much prefer Johnson to Trump, (maybe more?) who I think would be happy to team up with the Democrats, to stop Trump.
A lot of maybes and what ifs, Johnson remaines a long shot, but he is getting shorter!
If Leave narrowly lose the referendum, Farage steps down as UKIP leader and Suzanne Evans replaces him as Sturgeon did Salmond would be very interesting
And just like them, Farage would still think he was in charge (as Salmond does)
For years I have seen well off people proclaim their support for a Labour party, safe in the knowledge its left wing policies have been nothing more than sound bites. And the choice has been beteen three middle class parties. Look how often you see comments here about how run down and poor parts of England are - Jaywick comes to mind - but nothing about doing anything about it. Well Corbyn looks like the old Labour party, and a least it will make a dfference. And if as it was before we have 97.5% income tax (and a 40% supplement charged the next year) and sad stories of having to send a child to the local state school, other people will benefit.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
All of which was utterly predictable. David Cameron has behaved exactly in character and the Tory headbangers have behaved exactly in character. Tory Leavers didn't really just want a referendum, they wanted to win. They will never forgive anyone who they perceive to have thwarted them.
I'm sorry but this is bullshit
If Cameron is so ruthless at politics and brilliant at wining, how come he didn't win a decent renegotiation in Brussels? How come he came back with a deal so insultingly bad, he himself has barely mentioned it since?
THAT was his Original Sin. That was the grotesque failure - or the howling and deliberate lie - from which all else springs.
But remember, if Cameron hadn't got that deal he would have recommended Leave.
And if anyone believes that, god help you.
The ultimate slap in the face is the "deal" has now left us in a worse position than if Cameron had not bothered at all. We have now lost the veto which would have given us some leverage over the EU.
You obviously don't understand the deal as was negotiated.
No. You don't. I strongly suspect from your postings about it that you have only read one (the headline one) of the seven separate documents that form the final deal. It is the only way to explain your very poor lack of understanding.
If Leave narrowly lose the referendum, Farage steps down as UKIP leader and Suzanne Evans replaces him as Sturgeon did Salmond would be very interesting
And just like them, Farage would still think he was in charge (as Salmond does)
Indeed but it is a combination that has generally worked for the SNP
For years I have seen well off people proclaim their support for a Labour party, safe in the knowledge its left wing policies have been nothing more than sound bites. And the choice has been beteen three middle class parties. Look how often you see comments here about how run down and poor parts of England are - Jaywick comes to mind - but nothing about doing anything about it. Well Corbyn looks like the old Labour party, and a least it will make a dfference. And if as it was before we have 97.5% income tax (and a 40% supplement charged the next year) and sad stories of having to send a child to the local state school, other people will benefit.
Good point. Except for the fact that the very people the Labour party wants to "save", don't want to be saved. They want a capitalist system, red in tooth and claw, so that they can rise to the top.
They are not so keen on having lefty moron bien pensants "saving" them.
Governor Gary Johnson has just won the Libertarian Party Nomination for President!
www.garyjohnson2016.com
Ok this was the expected result, so no big news, but so far there have been 4 opinion poles that have included his name and all 4 have him at 10% or more. Now he has formaly won the nomination, I think there will be more poles conducted with his name on. The interest from that could feed back an put him over 15% and get him in the debates. if so he could, as a relatively unknown quantity, beat expectations, as Nick Clegg did in the 2010 debates in the UK.
On election day he does not need to win 50% of voters, he does not even need to win more voters that the over partys, all he needs to do is win sufishent number of states to, deny the other 2 of 270 Electrale Collage Votes, and then it goes to the US House of Representatives.
The House of Reps is curently Republican led, but there are 40-80 liberty minded republican reps who I think would much prefer Johnson to Trump, (maybe more?) who I think would be happy to team up with the Democrats, to stop Trump.
A lot of maybes and what ifs, Johnson remaines a long shot, but he is getting shorter!
What states would he win? Nothing and none.
I think the last third party candidate to win Electoral College votes was George Wallace.
Looking at tomorrow's front pages, Leave's big push on immigration doesn't feature, but only stories about trying to topple Dave.
Well played Leave.
Leave = Fruitcakes led by donkeys.
Surely that will encourage Labour supporters to vote Leave.
Yes.
They will smell blood.
Especially the working class ones who dislike the EU as well, and who can't utter the name Cameron without some mention of Bullingdon, Eton, Tory Posh boy etc etc.
Two birds. One stone.
Been saying this for over a month. Two Labour friends are voting Leave to hurt Cameron /Tories.
All of which was utterly predictable. David Cameron has behaved exactly in character and the Tory headbangers have behaved exactly in character. Tory Leavers didn't really just want a referendum, they wanted to win. They will never forgive anyone who they perceive to have thwarted them.
I'm sorry but this is bullshit
If Cameron is so ruthless at politics and brilliant at wining, how come he didn't win a decent renegotiation in Brussels? How come he came back with a deal so insultingly bad, he himself has barely mentioned it since?
THAT was his Original Sin. That was the grotesque failure - or the howling and deliberate lie - from which all else springs.
But remember, if Cameron hadn't got that deal he would have recommended Leave.
And if anyone believes that, god help you.
The ultimate slap in the face is the "deal" has now left us in a worse position than if Cameron had not bothered at all. We have now lost the veto which would have given us some leverage over the EU.
You obviously don't understand the deal as was negotiated.
No. You don't. I strongly suspect from your postings about it that you have only read one (the headline one) of the seven separate documents that form the final deal. It is the only way to explain your very poor lack of understanding.
Your concerns are predicated on the M Gove theory that the ECJ will strike down the deal just agreed by the 28 EU heads of state.
How is any Brexit deal going to get through the Commons? The other member states are surely not going to start negotiating until they can have confidence that the final agreement will actually be implemented. The more I think about it, the likelier it seems we'll either quit with no deal at all, or it'll take much longer than two years for us to leave.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
If I was David Cameron I would announce that I will stay in Office for three months post the referendum and then let the conservative party self destruct as that is what is going to happen if the extreme Brexit have their way. No matter that Corbyn is leader of labour the conservatives will not get another majority for years as it breaks in two, and loses my membership and many others in the process
It will not happen Big G. The conservative party will always survive as a governing party with FPTP.
Only if the party pulls itself together, a move to the right would be a big mistake
Possibly but there will be a space to move to the right, with no real political consequences.
But the party has to unite and the rebels need to come on board
Agreed but they will , the clever people in the conservative party know their enemy, and it was not Blair even with his 179 maj, the conservative partisans hated Blair in 97 -03 but the thoughtful ones learned from him. They have a true enemy now to unite against.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
As a non-Conservative, it is remarkable to see the way a Party which, just over 12 months ago, won an unlikely victory, seemingly tear itself apart.
I say "seemingly" because rhetoric is everything at times like this and the reality of governance will kick in on June 24th whichever side wins. The damage is not of course the row or the words themselves - the damage is the impression that a Party elected to govern is more interested in self-indulgence than governance.
the damage is the impression that a Party elected to govern is more interested in self-indulgence than governance.
but they are
they have no meaningful legislative programme for this Parlt.
There's nothing meaningful that would get passed. Too many Conservative MPs are off the reservation and there's no potential source of substitutes.
No this is a Cameron issue, the Queens speech was empty, he's not even trying.
The issue is not David Cameron. Unprecedentedly, Conservative MPs sought to amend the Queen's Speech. This was outrageous constitutionally but entirely predictable given the characters involved.
There was no chance of passing difficult legislation with too many Conservative MPs behaving in such bad faith.
No youre just in Tory nutter mode and seeking to blame them for all you dont like, Cameron sits in the chair and the buck stops with him, He is wasting a year of his parliamentary life doing nothing.
10 rogue Conservative MPs can stop any controversial legislation. There are far more than 10 rogue Conservative MPs.
And what ? Are you telling me a man in his position cant get a bit of cross party support of find some common ground ? Must be a shit politician then
Erm, have you actually looked at the composition of the current House of Commons?
Sometimes you seem like the very silliest poster on pb.
For years I have seen well off people proclaim their support for a Labour party, safe in the knowledge its left wing policies have been nothing more than sound bites. And the choice has been beteen three middle class parties. Look how often you see comments here about how run down and poor parts of England are - Jaywick comes to mind - but nothing about doing anything about it. Well Corbyn looks like the old Labour party, and a least it will make a dfference. And if as it was before we have 97.5% income tax (and a 40% supplement charged the next year) and sad stories of having to send a child to the local state school, other people will benefit.
Good point. Except for the fact that the very people the Labour party wants to "save", don't want to be saved. They want a capitalist system, red in tooth and claw, so that they can rise to the top.
They are not so keen on having lefty moron bien pensants "saving" them.
Do they want socialism? No. Do they want to scrap the NHS and the welfare state? No, they don't want that either
Top Gear was surprisingly almost identical to the old format. So it was old Top Gear without the three mates, and turned out to be what I expected it to be, "The Chris Evans" show, which is great if you like that sort of thing, but wearisome if you don't. I didn't think Evans was a good choice, he always dominates any show he is on and surrounds himself with cheer leaders, and I don't think he will change my mind.
Matt LeBlanc in the Ariel Nomad was by far the best part of the show. He delivered his lines well, and it was much more interesting than the challenge which was a pastiche of segments that were getting old several seasons ago.
Maybe next season someone other than Chris Evans could take over, Chris Harris would at least have the automotive journalism background.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
A few points for you to ponder:
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
Top Gear was surprisingly almost identical to the old format. So it was old Top Gear without the three mates, and turned out to be what I expected it to be, "The Chris Evans" show, which is great if you like that sort of thing, but wearisome if you don't. I didn't think Evans was a good choice, he always dominates any show he is on and surrounds himself with cheer leaders, and I don't think he will change my mind.
Matt LeBlanc in the Ariel Nomad was by far the best part of the show. He delivered his lines well, and it was much more interesting than the challenge which was a pastiche of segments that were getting old several seasons ago.
Maybe next season someone other than Chris Evans could take over, Chris Harris would at least have the automotive journalism background.
Harris had some good lines on the Extra Gear show, that were amusing and "natural"...rather than everything on the main show felt so forced...Even Joey doing his bit, it still felt like reading lines that had been written for him, rather than the old top gear where you weren't always sure were the scripted bit started and finished (when in reality it was all scripted, but it they did a good job of not making it feel that way).
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
Yep - if Remain does manage to scrape over the line the electorate will have given the green light to free movement having been consulted and having listened to all the arguments. No-one can ever again say they weren't asked.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
You show the very nasty side of remain.
Most of us have no problem with those who are not British by birth coming here, working or even residing if they so wish and raising families. We simply ask for it to be controlled and those that come bring benefit to this small island.
Your constant use of the words " whether we want foreigners coming over here" infers a very nasty insidious streak that you try and paint racism in those that want just basic controls not a free for all decided by others outside the country and those others unelected at that.
Governor Gary Johnson has just won the Libertarian Party Nomination for President!
www.garyjohnson2016.com
Ok this was the expected result, so no big news, but so far there have been 4 opinion poles that have included his name and all 4 have him at 10% or more. Now he has formaly won the nomination, I think there will be more poles conducted with his name on. The interest from that could feed back an put him over 15% and get him in the debates. if so he could, as a relatively unknown quantity, beat expectations, as Nick Clegg did in the 2010 debates in the UK.
On election day he does not need to win 50% of voters, he does not even need to win more voters that the over partys, all he needs to do is win sufishent number of states to, deny the other 2 of 270 Electrale Collage Votes, and then it goes to the US House of Representatives.
The House of Reps is curently Republican led, but there are 40-80 liberty minded republican reps who I think would much prefer Johnson to Trump, (maybe more?) who I think would be happy to team up with the Democrats, to stop Trump.
A lot of maybes and what ifs, Johnson remaines a long shot, but he is getting shorter!
What states would he win? Nothing and none.
Gary Johnson, could win New Mexico, where his was a very popular governor, he also has a shot in Utah, normaly very republican but this time Trump is just so unpopular with Mormans, also Colorado, where he started his cannabis company, possibly Navada as well, where the locale Libertarian pary is very well organised.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which may explain why Tory MPs are so furious.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
A few points for you to ponder:
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
What has an American style immigration system got to do with the welfare state and the NHS? Their immigration system seems almost as lax as ours which is why Trump is doing so well. Australia has a tougher immigration system and state healthcare and a welfare state
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which is why I am going to vote LEAVE and why I am beginning to doubt my fairly reliable vote for the Tory party (I've never been a member, of course).
Osborne's entire economic policy is premised on endless immigration fuelling endless growth in house prices and GDP (but not GDP per capita).
What will Britain be like with 75 million people? 85 million? How many will be hardcore Muslim and refuse to integrate? is there no end? 90 million. 100 million. It's fucking nuts.
Ultimately a country really can become too crowded, and ultimately a culture really can be threatened by large minorities refusing majority values. It has to stop. The whole policy and worldview of endlessly welcome mass immigration has to be challenged.
If we don't challenge it now, democratically, in the end the voters will elect Fascists. As we can clearly see.
We have 150,000 or so immigrating from outside EU each year. Leave wants to up that number, if Priti Patel is to be believed. Frankly, given the choice I'd rather have more from Europe and less from elsewhere - assimilation is easier and those concerned will be more mobile, staying a few years then heading home. However, if immigration is to be significantly reduced, we need a fundamental rethink on everything - it inevitably means big public spending cuts, for example. We'll also have to accept that emigration will fall as well, which means an older and less productive population.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
You show the very nasty side of remain.
Most of us have no problem with those who are not British by birth coming here, working or even residing if they so wish and raising families. We simply ask for it to be controlled and those that come bring benefit to this small island.
Your constant use of the words " whether we want foreigners coming over here" infers a very nasty insidious streak that you try and paint racism in those that want just basic controls not a free for all decided by others outside the country and those others unelected at that.
Calm down sweetheart.
We are in a free trade area that, as part of its free-ness, embraces free movement of people seeking work. I believe that this is sensible given the lack of impact on employment and small impact on wages (NIESR). You don't. Fair enough. So vote Leave and stop them coming in. We are all winners.
Ask me to think you're a great guy because you want to restrict immigration to those you prefer, and discriminate against those you don't want to come here? Go f*ck yourself.
Harris had some good lines on the Extra Gear show, that were amusing and "natural"...rather than everything on the main show felt so forced...Even Joey doing his bit, it still felt like reading lines that had been written for him, rather than the old top gear where you weren't always sure were the scripted bit started and finished (when in reality it was all scripted, but it they did a good job of not making it feel that way).
I though LeBlanc reading his lines was more entertaining than Chris Evan screaming WOOH!
Clarkson and May both knew a lot of nerdy stuff about cars, and even Hammond fitted in quite well as an enthusiast and foil for the other two. The old show was 75% arseing around and 25% three middle aged men one-upping one another to show how much they knew.
Tonight's Top Gear was mainly Evans doing his same old zoo radio schtick.
Matt LeBlanc was also fairly shit. Let it be said. He was leaden and tedious, and barely raised a smile. He just shone in comparison to the total darkness that was Chris Evans.
At its best - if it improves markedly - this will now be a fairly mediocre car show with high production values, but lacking that crucial alchemy. The BBC has shot the golden goose.
Putting on my tinfoil hat, I wonder if the shitness of the new TopGear explains the weirdly early departure of Danny Cohen as BBC TV controller - the man who sacked Clarkson. Did some bigwigs realise the new Top Gear was already rubbish, and Cohen should carry the can?
It makes the Daily Mail stories of disaster behind the scenes and people jumping ship left, right and centre sound credible, despite GingerNut telling everybody that it was all bollocks.
What will Britain be like with 75 million people? 85 million? How many will be hardcore Muslim and refuse to integrate? is there no end? 90 million. 100 million. It's fucking nuts.
No more mad than perpetual economic growth that essentially all economies require to keep the plates spinning. Eventually the laws of physics will get in the way.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which may explain why Tory MPs are so furious.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
The reality has been clear for years. If Osborne knew so did the Conservative party as a whole. And it's been pointed out on here enough times over recent years. It's been an inconvenient truth that Tory Leavers have chosen to ignore.
Governor Gary Johnson has just won the Libertarian Party Nomination for President!
www.garyjohnson2016.com
Ok this was the expected result, so no big news, but so far there have been 4 opinion poles that have included his name and all 4 have him at 10% or more. Now he has formaly won the nomination, I think there will be more poles conducted with his name on. The interest from that could feed back an put him over 15% and get him in the debates. if so he could, as a relatively unknown quantity, beat expectations, as Nick Clegg did in the 2010 debates in the UK.
On election day he does not need to win 50% of voters, he does not even need to win more voters that the over partys, all he needs to do is win sufishent number of states to, deny the other 2 of 270 Electrale Collage Votes, and then it goes to the US House of Representatives.
The House of Reps is curently Republican led, but there are 40-80 liberty minded republican reps who I think would much prefer Johnson to Trump, (maybe more?) who I think would be happy to team up with the Democrats, to stop Trump.
A lot of maybes and what ifs, Johnson remaines a long shot, but he is getting shorter!
What states would he win? Nothing and none.
I think the last third party candidate to win Electoral College votes was George Wallace.
Johnson will not win a single electoral college vote. The polling is split on whom he would most hurt, with Hillary probably edging out Trump, particularly if Weld is on the bottom of the ticket.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which may explain why Tory MPs are so furious.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
The reality has been clear for years. If Osborne knew so did the Conservative party as a whole. And it's been pointed out on here enough times over recent years. It's been an inconvenient truth that Tory Leavers have chosen to ignore.
Well, it's been bloody noticed by the population at large now.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
You show the very nasty side of remain.
Most of us have no problem with those who are not British by birth coming here, working or even residing if they so wish and raising families. We simply ask for it to be controlled and those that come bring benefit to this small island.
Your constant use of the words " whether we want foreigners coming over here" infers a very nasty insidious streak that you try and paint racism in those that want just basic controls not a free for all decided by others outside the country and those others unelected at that.
He implied I was a waycissst earlier. I'm not going to bother with him.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
A few points for you to ponder:
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
What has an American style immigration system got to do with the welfare state and the NHS? Their immigration system seems almost as lax as ours which is why Trump is doing so well. Australia has a tougher immigration system and state healthcare and a welfare state
'From cradle to grave.'
If substantial numbers of people here aren't born here and substantial numbers of people born here emigrate, the whole system loses popular support.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which may explain why Tory MPs are so furious.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
The reality has been clear for years. If Osborne knew so did the Conservative party as a whole. And it's been pointed out on here enough times over recent years. It's been an inconvenient truth that Tory Leavers have chosen to ignore.
Well, it's been bloody noticed by the population at large now.
I am not sure the population has yet realised the massive spending cuts coming post-Brexit. Certainly, the Leave side has made no mention of them - despite professed concern about the services ordinary people rely on.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
A few points for you to ponder:
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
What has an American style immigration system got to do with the welfare state and the NHS? Their immigration system seems almost as lax as ours which is why Trump is doing so well. Australia has a tougher immigration system and state healthcare and a welfare state
'From cradle to grave.'
If substantial numbers of people here aren't born here and substantial numbers of people born here emigrate, the whole system loses popular support.
Most migrants have to contribute to get benefits anyway, certainly for the first few years so I don't think that follows
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which may explain why Tory MPs are so furious.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
The reality has been clear for years. If Osborne knew so did the Conservative party as a whole. And it's been pointed out on here enough times over recent years. It's been an inconvenient truth that Tory Leavers have chosen to ignore.
Well, it's been bloody noticed by the population at large now.
I am not sure the population has yet realised the massive spending cuts coming post-Brexit. Certainly, the Leave side has made no mention of them - despite professed concern about the services ordinary people rely on.
What massive spending cuts are those? We'll have more money, not less.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Whiction has to be challenged.
If we don't challenge it now, democratically, in the end the voters will elect Fascists. As we can clearly see.
We have 150,000 or so immigrating from outside EU each year. Leave wants to up that number, if Priti Patel is to be believed. Frankly, given the choice I'd rather have more from Europe and less from elsewhere - assimilation is easier and those concerned will be more mobile, staying a few years then heading home. However, if immigration is to be significantly reduced, we need a fundamental rethink on everything - it inevitably means big public spending cuts, for example. We'll also have to accept that emigration will fall as well, which means an older and less productive population.
Agreed.
Of course this is bigger than the UK. Though Brexit is part of the same process.
Unless someone stops Muslim immigration into Europe then a major European country will - pretty soon - elect a far right government.
Quite possibly France and the Netherlands next year, already at least 40% chance I would say
Matt LeBlanc was also fairly shit. Let it be said. He was leaden and tedious, and barely raised a smile. He just shone in comparison to the total darkness that was Chris Evans.
At its best - if it improves markedly - this will now be a fairly mediocre car show with high production values, but lacking that crucial alchemy. The BBC has shot the golden goose.
Putting on my tinfoil hat, I wonder if the shitness of the new TopGear explains the weirdly early departure of Danny Cohen as BBC TV controller - the man who sacked Clarkson. Did some bigwigs realise the new Top Gear was already rubbish, and Cohen should carry the can?
It makes the Daily Mail stories of disaster behind the scenes and people jumping ship left, right and centre sound credible, despite GingerNut telling everybody that it was all bollocks.
I don't get to see it on BBC America until tomorrow evening, but it sounds as if it's down to expectations. Maybe the commercial interruptions might actually help.
Did they do the Cool Wall? That would be the worst.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yep. And it is immigration which could easily win it for LEAVE.
He was never going to get a deal on immigration; especially given he knew continued high levels of immigration were (are) key to the government's economic and fiscal strategy.
Which may explain why Tory MPs are so furious.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
The reality has been clear for years. If Osborne knew so did the Conservative party as a whole. And it's been pointed out on here enough times over recent years. It's been an inconvenient truth that Tory Leavers have chosen to ignore.
Well, it's been bloody noticed by the population at large now.
I am not sure the population has yet realised the massive spending cuts coming post-Brexit. Certainly, the Leave side has made no mention of them - despite professed concern about the services ordinary people rely on.
What massive spending cuts are those? We'll have more money, not less.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three.
Roger, amongst others, breezily informed us that the BBC was brilliant at remaking formats and all would be well...
How many shows have ever been remade successfully?. Top Gear as a factual show that reinvented itself is notable for its rarity, but generally remakes of TV shows flop. If a show was a hit and you remake it you tend to annoy the viewers that liked the old show, and if a show was a flop well you are probably foolish to remake it, it likely flopped because it was a bad idea.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
You show the very nasty side of remain.
Most of us have no problem with those who are not British by birth coming here, working or even residing if they so wish and raising families. We simply ask for it to be controlled and those that come bring benefit to this small island.
Your constant use of the words " whether we want foreigners coming over here" infers a very nasty insidious streak that you try and paint racism in those that want just basic controls not a free for all decided by others outside the country and those others unelected at that.
He implied I was a waycissst earlier. I'm not going to bother with him.
Harris had some good lines on the Extra Gear show, that were amusing and "natural"...rather than everything on the main show felt so forced...Even Joey doing his bit, it still felt like reading lines that had been written for him, rather than the old top gear where you weren't always sure were the scripted bit started and finished (when in reality it was all scripted, but it they did a good job of not making it feel that way).
I though LeBlanc reading his lines was more entertaining than Chris Evan screaming WOOH!
Clarkson and May both knew a lot of nerdy stuff about cars, and even Hammond fitted in quite well as an enthusiast and foil for the other two. The old show was 75% arseing around and 25% three middle aged men one-upping one another to show how much they knew.
Tonight's Top Gear was mainly Evans doing his same old zoo radio schtick.
All three of the Old Top Gear were quite excellent presenters in their own right: likeable, personable, well-informed, witty, and annoying in a good way (or a bad way if you are a Guardianista). It was just sheer good luck that they ALSO happened to bond so well (apparently) on screen, and create a whole greater than the parts. Some of their specials - Bolivia, Arctic, Nile, Vietnam, Botswana - were some of the best TV ever made, in any genre, anywhere.
At the time Clarkson was sacked, a few of us here tried to tried to point out how magical and unrepeatable this comedic alchemy was, and therefore how the Beeb had made a terrible error.
Roger, amongst others, breezily informed us that the BBC was brilliant at remaking formats and all would be well...
The Top Gear format is used in Australia and the USA, among others. Maybe to Roger they count as brilliant remakes.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
As you say short term.
At a minimum. But even short term hits to government income will have long term effects.
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
A few points for you to ponder:
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
What has an American style immigration system got to do with the welfare state and the NHS? Their immigration system seems almost as lax as ours which is why Trump is doing so well. Australia has a tougher immigration system and state healthcare and a welfare state
'From cradle to grave.'
If substantial numbers of people here aren't born here and substantial numbers of people born here emigrate, the whole system loses popular support.
Most migrants have to contribute to get benefits anyway, certainly for the first few years so I don't think that follows
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
As you say short term.
At a minimum. But even short term hits to government income will have long term effects.
Stop this Project Fear stuff.
We've survived a bloody great financial crash. Stop trying to portray a blip as a depression.
We will, in any case, have all our contributions to the EU and any tariffs levied in the absence of trade deals.
I have never watched Top Gear. And never will. Cars are a means to an end. That's all.
You didn't have to like cars, or even care about cars, or even drive a car, to like Top Gear at its best. That was the whole point. It was three middle aged guys joshing - often very wittily - about decline and decay and the futility of life - and then having great fun, nonetheless, and in some fabulous locations.
It was often poignant, and sometimes even profound. And it could, occasionally, be fantastically funny - better than almost any sitcom. Thanks mainly to Clarkson having superb comic timing.
What will Britain be like with 75 million people? 85 million? How many will be hardcore Muslim and refuse to integrate? is there no end? 90 million. 100 million. It's fucking nuts.
No more mad than perpetual economic growth that essentially all economies require to keep the plates spinning. Eventually the laws of physics will get in the way.
There's no law of physics preventing constant economic growth. It just means people get gradually better at making stuff and as a result make more of it. Making stuff consists of changing things in one shape to another shape and moving them around. Matter is conserved, so you're not going to run out of things.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
As you say short term.
At a minimum. But even short term hits to government income will have long term effects.
Stop this Project Fear stuff.
We've survived a bloody great financial crash. Stop trying to portray a blip as a depression.
We will, in any case, have all our contributions to the EU and any tariffs levied in the absence of trade deals.
We have survived the crash, but at great cost. You may not need the public services that will be cut post-Brexit, but many of your fellow citizens do. If the tax take goes down our EU contributions will not be extra money, they'll be plugging gaps in current spending.
You are rightly angry with the Tories and the government for misleading voters about immigration. You surely don't want people to be misled about the consequences of Brexit, do you?
It's interesting in Cameron's referendums that he wins the war but loses the peace.
AV was a big win but killed trust within the coalition, destroyed boundary changes and generally paralysed the Government for much of the rest of the term.
Scottish Independence was a resounding "NO" in the end, but SNP won big subsequently, and there's a sense of inevitability that the future belongs to them.
EU will likely be "Remain" but will effectively end his Premiership either way.
When the history books are written, it will be a tale of three referendums - all won, all ultimately disastrous.
OT Someone on FB posted up a fragment of poetry which I think sums up perfectly the current argument over Brexit. This should be on a Leave poster
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, What if you fly?”
That may (or may not) accurately represent the 2015 argument over Brexit, but for the past 3/4 weeks the current argument has been:
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS LOOK LOOK LOOK MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS EW!”
How about doing next to nothing about the immigration crisis in this country?
Yes, I agree. The immigration bit was farcical. He should never have made his tens of thousands "promise". It diminished him then and diminishes him and the Remain campaign now.
I think it is clear that if you are concerned about immigration, then you would be justified in voting Leave.
However, the deal achieved a lot besides the sop to immigration in terms of defining our relationship with the EU. And if you are meh on immigration (you don't have to be) then there are few other grounds, IMO, to vote Leave.
If Cameron had got any worthwhile deal about immigration, Remain would be absolutely walking this referendum campaign.
Yes. Hondootedly.
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
A few points for you to ponder:
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
What has an American style immigration system got to do with the welfare state and the NHS? Their immigration system seems almost as lax as ours which is why Trump is doing so well. Australia has a tougher immigration system and state healthcare and a welfare state
'From cradle to grave.'
If substantial numbers of people here aren't born here and substantial numbers of people born here emigrate, the whole system loses popular support.
Most migrants have to contribute to get benefits anyway, certainly for the first few years so I don't think that follows
Medical care? Schools? Nope.
Tax credits? Not sure.
Council housing? Some other benefits? Yes.
Tax credits you only get through working anyway, the NHS and schools everyone is entitled to, council housing and benefits the native population can get without contributing, immigrants cannot
Your concerns are predicated on the M Gove theory that the ECJ will strike down the deal just agreed by the 28 EU heads of state.
No. My concerns are predicated on a number of different ways in which the agreements, slight as they are, can be ignored or overruled. A significant number of the measures need approval from the European Parliament and they have already made clear they oppose some of them. Others including the emergency brake on migration need the approval of the individual Parliaments of the 28 nations. And even after that could be subject to challenge by the constitutional courts of those countries.
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your dismissal of the ECJ again displays a terrible lack of understanding. The ECj is not there to uphold decisions made by the national governments or the Council of Ministers or any other body. They are there to interpret the law in accordance with the EU treaties. All it will take is one individual making a formal complaint to the ECJ and they will consider it their duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
What will Britain be like with 75 million people? 85 million? How many will be hardcore Muslim and refuse to integrate? is there no end? 90 million. 100 million. It's fucking nuts.
No more mad than perpetual economic growth that essentially all economies require to keep the plates spinning. Eventually the laws of physics will get in the way.
There's no law of physics preventing constant economic growth. It just means people get gradually better at making stuff and as a result make more of it. Making stuff consists of changing things in one shape to another shape and moving them around. Matter is conserved, so you're not going to run out of things.
Ah, but there are physical laws that govern economic growth. Ultimately they relate to the efficiency of energy usage in systems, particularly photosynthesis. For example, no matter the technological progress we make in genetically modifying organisms, there is a limit to how much food can be grown on the planet governed ultimately by how efficiently chloroplasts convert solar energy into chemical energy. We are not yet near the asymptote for that yet, but it exists. We breach the asymptote only by using up non-renewable energy, or by expanding the system.
It's interesting in Cameron's referendums that he wins the war but loses the peace.
AV was a big win but killed trust within the coalition, destroyed boundary changes and generally paralysed the Government for much of the rest of the term.
Scottish Independence was a resounding "NO" in the end, but SNP won big subsequently, and there's a sense of inevitability that the future belongs to them.
EU will likely be "Remain" but will effectively end his Premiership either way.
When the history books are written, it will be a tale of three referendums - all won, all ultimately disastrous.
Ironically of course had Dave lost the AV referendum he would most likely have got most UKIP voters second preferences and never have to worry about losing Tory Leave voters to UKIP after a Remain win at all!
Tax credits you only get through working anyway, the NHS and schools everyone is entitled to, council housing and benefits the native population can get without contributing, immigrants cannot
***Revised*** Medical care? Schools? Tax credits? Nope.
OT Someone on FB posted up a fragment of poetry which I think sums up perfectly the current argument over Brexit. This should be on a Leave poster
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, What if you fly?”
That may (or may not) accurately represent the 2015 argument over Brexit, but for the past 3/4 weeks the current argument has been:
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS LOOK LOOK LOOK MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS EW!”
I have never watched Top Gear. And never will. Cars are a means to an end. That's all.
You didn't have to like cars, or even care about cars, or even drive a car, to like Top Gear at its best. That was the whole point. It was three middle aged guys joshing - often very wittily - about decline and decay and the futility of life - and then having great fun, nonetheless, and in some fabulous locations.
It was often poignant, and sometimes even profound. And it could, occasionally, be fantastically funny - better than almost any sitcom. Thanks mainly to Clarkson having superb comic timing.
Ah well. All gone now. You missed out.
My wife liked and laughed at Top Gear.
Doesn't like cars and wouldn't like a blokey show normally.
Great show.
The new one, not so good. Still we shall be watching proper Top Gear on Amazon Prime when available.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
As you say short term.
At a minimum. But even short term hits to government income will have long term effects.
Stop this Project Fear stuff.
We've survived a bloody great financial crash. Stop trying to portray a blip as a depression.
We will, in any case, have all our contributions to the EU and any tariffs levied in the absence of trade deals.
We have survived the crash, but at great cost. You may not need the public services that will be cut post-Brexit, but many of your fellow citizens do. If the tax take goes down our EU contributions will not be extra money, they'll be plugging gaps in current spending.
You are rightly angry with the Tories and the government for misleading voters about immigration. You surely don't want people to be misled about the consequences of Brexit, do you?
Well stop lying by omission, then.
If the population growth falls, growth in public expenditure doesn't have to be as high.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
As you say short term.
At a minimum. But even short term hits to government income will have long term effects.
Stop this Project Fear stuff.
We've survived a bloody great financial crash. Stop trying to portray a blip as a depression.
We will, in any case, have all our contributions to the EU and any tariffs levied in the absence of trade deals.
And the benefits of any trade deals we can negotiate on our own without the need to please vested interests in 27 other countries.
No, we won't. All government economic and fiscal targets are predicated on high immigration. Most commentators - even Leave ones - expect a short term hit to growth if Leave wins. That will mean a reduction in the tax take and so more borrowing, even more cuts or tax rises, or maybe a bit of all three
As you say short term.
At a minimum. But even short term hits to government income will have long term effects.
Stop this Project Fear stuff.
We've survived a bloody great financial crash. Stop trying to portray a blip as a depression.
We will, in any case, have all our contributions to the EU and any tariffs levied in the absence of trade deals.
And the benefits of any trade deals we can negotiate on our own without the need to please vested interests in 27 other countries.
It's interesting in Cameron's referendums that he wins the war but loses the peace.
AV was a big win but killed trust within the coalition, destroyed boundary changes and generally paralysed the Government for much of the rest of the term.
Scottish Independence was a resounding "NO" in the end, but SNP won big subsequently, and there's a sense of inevitability that the future belongs to them.
EU will likely be "Remain" but will effectively end his Premiership either way.
When the history books are written, it will be a tale of three referendums - all won, all ultimately disastrous.
Ironically of course had Dave lost the AV referendum he would most likely have got most UKIP voters second preferences and never have to worry about losing Tory Leave voters to UKIP after a Remain win at all!
If Dave had lost the AV referendum, we would not be having the EU referendum at all.
OT Someone on FB posted up a fragment of poetry which I think sums up perfectly the current argument over Brexit. This should be on a Leave poster
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, What if you fly?”
That may (or may not) accurately represent the 2015 argument over Brexit, but for the past 3/4 weeks the current argument has been:
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS LOOK LOOK LOOK MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS EW!”
No it really hasn't. That is just you hearing what you want to hear.
OT Someone on FB posted up a fragment of poetry which I think sums up perfectly the current argument over Brexit. This should be on a Leave poster
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, What if you fly?”
That may (or may not) accurately represent the 2015 argument over Brexit, but for the past 3/4 weeks the current argument has been:
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS LOOK LOOK LOOK MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS EW!”
No it really hasn't. That is just you hearing what you want to hear.
If you believe that then you don't read the Mail and the Sun.
What will Britain be like with 75 million people? 85 million? How many will be hardcore Muslim and refuse to integrate? is there no end? 90 million. 100 million. It's fucking nuts.
No more mad than perpetual economic growth that essentially all economies require to keep the plates spinning. Eventually the laws of physics will get in the way.
There's no law of physics preventing constant economic growth. It just means people get gradually better at making stuff and as a result make more of it. Making stuff consists of changing things in one shape to another shape and moving them around. Matter is conserved, so you're not going to run out of things.
Ah, but there are physical laws that govern economic growth. Ultimately they relate to the efficiency of energy usage in systems, particularly photosynthesis. For example, no matter the technological progress we make in genetically modifying organisms, there is a limit to how much food can be grown on the planet governed ultimately by how efficiently chloroplasts convert solar energy into chemical energy. We are not yet near the asymptote for that yet, but it exists. We breach the asymptote only by using up non-renewable energy, or by expanding the system.
Moonbase Alpha, here we come. And I suspect that the referendum is now going to have to be postponed over the postal votes.
It's interesting in Cameron's referendums that he wins the war but loses the peace.
AV was a big win but killed trust within the coalition, destroyed boundary changes and generally paralysed the Government for much of the rest of the term.
Scottish Independence was a resounding "NO" in the end, but SNP won big subsequently, and there's a sense of inevitability that the future belongs to them.
EU will likely be "Remain" but will effectively end his Premiership either way.
When the history books are written, it will be a tale of three referendums - all won, all ultimately disastrous.
Ironically of course had Dave lost the AV referendum he would most likely have got most UKIP voters second preferences and never have to worry about losing Tory Leave voters to UKIP after a Remain win at all!
If Dave had lost the AV referendum, we would not be having the EU referendum at all.
Would he have resigned had he lost? I doubt it and AV would have made a Tory majority even more likely in 2015
OT Someone on FB posted up a fragment of poetry which I think sums up perfectly the current argument over Brexit. This should be on a Leave poster
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, What if you fly?”
That may (or may not) accurately represent the 2015 argument over Brexit, but for the past 3/4 weeks the current argument has been:
“There is freedom waiting for you, On the breezes of the sky, And you ask "What if I fall?" Oh but my darling, MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS LOOK LOOK LOOK MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS EW!”
No it really hasn't. That is just you hearing what you want to hear.
If you believe that then you don't read the Mail and the Sun.
No I don't. And the Mail and the Sun are not the Leave campaign.
So much for Mark Senior's claim that it was just one of Leave's 'Stream of Lies'.
Just one more thing he is wrong about.
Well it could be counter-productive - certainly goes against the innate British attitude of fair play. So the Brexiters will be only too pleased to run with this for as long as they can.
Comments
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/737033276964122624
They are not so keen on having lefty moron bien pensants "saving" them.
The Tories have removed far greater and more successful leaders than him in their not to distant past...
At least we are at a point whereby the electorate can focus their minds on what sort of a UK they want. The EU debate having come down to whether we want foreigners coming over here and doing this or that.
They don't even need to depose him.
10 MPs can keep him in limbo for the rest of parliament.
They have a true enemy now to unite against.
Matt LeBlanc in the Ariel Nomad was by far the best part of the show. He delivered his lines well, and it was much more interesting than the challenge which was a pastiche of segments that were getting old several seasons ago.
Maybe next season someone other than Chris Evans could take over, Chris Harris would at least have the automotive journalism background.
Do we ourselves wish to settle in the EU e.g. retire to Spain?
Do we want to have an American-style immigration system? That would probably be the end of the Welfare State including the NHS.
Are Irish citizens counted in the immigration figures? How are they counted with an open land border? If non-Irish EU citizens come via the Irish Republic (e.g. after the housing crash), how are they picked up in the figures?
Most of us have no problem with those who are not British by birth coming here, working or even residing if they so wish and raising families. We simply ask for it to be controlled and those that come bring benefit to this small island.
Your constant use of the words " whether we want foreigners coming over here" infers a very nasty insidious streak that you try and paint racism in those that want just basic controls not a free for all decided by others outside the country and those others unelected at that.
All those economic forecasts over the past weeks expressly admitting that Cameron has been lying for the last 6 years over immigration. And Tory MPs have repeated those lies to their constituents for as long, especially at GE2015. No wonder they are spitting bullets.
We are in a free trade area that, as part of its free-ness, embraces free movement of people seeking work. I believe that this is sensible given the lack of impact on employment and small impact on wages (NIESR). You don't. Fair enough. So vote Leave and stop them coming in. We are all winners.
Ask me to think you're a great guy because you want to restrict immigration to those you prefer, and discriminate against those you don't want to come here? Go f*ck yourself.
Clarkson and May both knew a lot of nerdy stuff about cars, and even Hammond fitted in quite well as an enthusiast and foil for the other two. The old show was 75% arseing around and 25% three middle aged men one-upping one another to show how much they knew.
Tonight's Top Gear was mainly Evans doing his same old zoo radio schtick.
Robert Kimball
A 'NO' leaflet from the 1975 Referendum campaign. The people WERE warned! https://t.co/1IgWT87uAm
I would think a Remain win?
If substantial numbers of people here aren't born here and substantial numbers of people born here emigrate, the whole system loses popular support.
Did they do the Cool Wall? That would be the worst.
https://twitter.com/ladpolitics/status/736994994268086273
Tax credits? Not sure.
Council housing? Some other benefits? Yes.
We've survived a bloody great financial crash. Stop trying to portray a blip as a depression.
We will, in any case, have all our contributions to the EU and any tariffs levied in the absence of trade deals.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/29/voters-in-the-eu-referendum-told-to-vote-for-remain-in-postal-vo/
You are rightly angry with the Tories and the government for misleading voters about immigration. You surely don't want people to be misled about the consequences of Brexit, do you?
AV was a big win but killed trust within the coalition, destroyed boundary changes and generally paralysed the Government for much of the rest of the term.
Scottish Independence was a resounding "NO" in the end, but SNP won big subsequently, and there's a sense of inevitability that the future belongs to them.
EU will likely be "Remain" but will effectively end his Premiership either way.
When the history books are written, it will be a tale of three referendums - all won, all ultimately disastrous.
Rose?
ROSE?
How dare you sir!
“There is freedom waiting for you,
On the breezes of the sky,
And you ask "What if I fall?"
Oh but my darling,
MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS LOOK LOOK LOOK MIGRANTS MIGRANTS MIGRANTS EW!”
The measures to prevent the Eurozone from acting as a bloc only require the Council of Ministers to listen to objections by non-Eurozone countries. They do not require them to actually change anything. They can still proceed with measures detrimental to the non Eurozone countries as long as they can be shown to be necessary for the Eurozone and not simply proposed to place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage. They can place non Eurozone countries at a disadvantage but that cannot be the only reason for the measure.
And your dismissal of the ECJ again displays a terrible lack of understanding. The ECj is not there to uphold decisions made by the national governments or the Council of Ministers or any other body. They are there to interpret the law in accordance with the EU treaties. All it will take is one individual making a formal complaint to the ECJ and they will consider it their duty (indeed they are obligated by treaty) to make a ruling on the matter.
In case you forgot this already happened with the Working Time Directive opt out which was agreed by all members as part of the Maastricht Treaty and was then overturned a year or two later by the ECJ. They have a history of doing this.
Medical care? Schools? Tax credits? Nope.
Council housing? Some other benefits? Yes.
Doesn't like cars and wouldn't like a blokey show normally.
Great show.
The new one, not so good. Still we shall be watching proper Top Gear on Amazon Prime when available.
If the population growth falls, growth in public expenditure doesn't have to be as high.
Just one more thing he is wrong about.