What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
How do PBers think PB's Alanbrooke react when I do a thread with the following comparisons
Dave = Sir Winston Churchill
Tory Leavers = The modern day Lord Halifaxes
George Osborne = Field Marshall Sir Alan Brooke
He'll probably point out that Field Marshal only has one 'L'.
On the substance, depends on the context, though I'd have thought that whereas Brooke prevented some of Churchill's wilder notions, I get the impression that it's Osborne who's been ideologically adventurous.
I'm not sure that the historical parallel is all that exact (though they never are so i wouldn't worry that excessively): Halifax had been packed off to the US by the time Churchill came to work with Brooke, I think?
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Is that true? The Mail (etc) can easily destroy an individual politician's reputation. As such, they will always get attention and respect.
This referendum could be where we hear the crash of the dead tree press toppling over.
Fancy a wager about that?!
Not with you, no. I have no idea who you are.
In any case, I doubt we could agree on framing terms.
Well a PM would sort out the who I am bit so that sounds like evasion to me. And I'm sure I could frame something suitable. For instance, who wins the vote?!
There are other markets where I prefer to put my money for betting on that proposition.
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
My comment is factually correct. A better argument is that they are in a better position to bear that burden than most.
Which poorer people can better bear the impact of higher taxes than richer people? You should have left out your last two words.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
@AlastairMeeks was drawing our attention to some rather tasty odds for elections in 2016 and 2017 a couple of days ago. I don't see a stable government in either a remain or a leave scenario. The winning side will set the manifesto for the next election for the Conservative party and those on the other side will have to decide whether they can reconcile themselves to that or not.
How do PBers think PB's Alanbrooke react when I do a thread with the following comparisons
Dave = Sir Winston Churchill
Tory Leavers = The modern day Lord Halifaxes
George Osborne = Field Marshall Sir Alan Brooke
He'll probably point out that Field Marshal only has one 'L'.
On the substance, depends on the context, though I'd have thought that whereas Brooke prevented some of Churchill's wilder notions, I get the impression that it's Osborne who's been ideologically adventurous.
I'm not sure that the historical parallel is all that exact (though they never are so i wouldn't worry that excessively): Halifax had been packed off to the US by the time Churchill came to work with Brooke, I think?
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
Given there's eff-all squared in the Queen's Speech - a GE wouldn't make much impact on HMG's day job.
Bar nonsense like spaceports and reannounced fluff, either Cameron has run out of ideas pretty early - or he's cleared the decks just-in-case.
The Tory press is reflecting the anger of many conservatives. I have been a Conservative activist since the 1980s and have never felt so detached from my party. Things are not going to go back to being happy families by the end of this month. Cameron has behaved digracefully in this campaign and sickened many of us who put him there. There will have to be a reckoning within the party. Good news for Mr Corbyn and good luck to him. Those of us who have been on the receiving end of Bullingdon bullies must stick together.
Couldn't agree more.
If Osborne gets anywhere near the leadership I will be resigning my membership.
When you discover you've actually got New Labour Plus, not Tories - it's perfectly understandable that so many are unhappy/feel duped.
In fairness to Cameron and Osborne they've never hidden their admiration for Blair's Labour. The heir to Blair and George revere Tony as "The Master".
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Estobar, the front page of the Mail claimed that remaining in the EU would put pensions in peril.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Is that true? The Mail (etc) can easily destroy an individual politician's reputation. As such, they will always get attention and respect.
This referendum could be where we hear the crash of the dead tree press toppling over.
Fancy a wager about that?!
Not with you, no. I have no idea who you are.
In any case, I doubt we could agree on framing terms.
Well a PM would sort out the who I am bit so that sounds like evasion to me. And I'm sure I could frame something suitable. For instance, who wins the vote?!
There are other markets where I prefer to put my money for betting on that proposition.
Okay. I have to get back to work, but given your assertion about the press you will presumably concede then that, should Leave in fact win, your claim about the toppling of the dead tree press will have been proven wrong. I'll leave that without a question mark.
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Estobar, the front page of the Mail claimed that remaining in the EU would put pensions in peril.
It did so on the basis of a proposal that has been specifically abandoned.
Aversions are sometimes founded on facts.
You claimed that the last sentence of the article admitted itself that it was wrong. It does absolutely nothing of the sort. The mendacious one there is you, my friend.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Is that true? The Mail (etc) can easily destroy an individual politician's reputation. As such, they will always get attention and respect.
This referendum could be where we hear the crash of the dead tree press toppling over.
Fancy a wager about that?!
Not with you, no. I have no idea who you are.
In any case, I doubt we could agree on framing terms.
Well a PM would sort out the who I am bit so that sounds like evasion to me. And I'm sure I could frame something suitable. For instance, who wins the vote?!
There are other markets where I prefer to put my money for betting on that proposition.
Okay. I have to get back to work, but given your assertion about the press you will presumably concede then that, should Leave in fact win, your claim about the toppling of the dead tree press will have been proven wrong. I'll leave that without a question mark.
My original comment on the subject started with the word If. Perhaps you should learn to read a bit more attentively?
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
The poorest have been hardest hit. The richest have been least affected. And that pattern is set to continue:
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Estobar, the front page of the Mail claimed that remaining in the EU would put pensions in peril.
It did so on the basis of a proposal that has been specifically abandoned.
Aversions are sometimes founded on facts.
You claimed that the last sentence of the article admitted itself that it was wrong. It does absolutely nothing of the sort. The mendacious one there is you, my friend.
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I've little doubt that Estobar, Plato and the rest of that crew will tell us that lefties cause hardship to everyone else just by breathing...
As you well know, the press tends to play to its audience. Anything else is an indulgence. I buy one newspaper a week (Sunday), but tend to read them otherwise ... waiting rooms, trains, buses, and pick up a little vicarious knowledge from the press reviews.
I remember the Mirror being an interesting read many years ago before it gave in to celeb culture. In 1962/63, when I started as a paper boy I delivered loads of Expresses, a lot of Mirrors, a few Mails, and one Times (the owner of Jakeman's sweets). The Sun hadn't been born.
Not necessarily typical, but I used to read them on the way round - when I wasn't falling over as it was an icy winter. Hardly a article about celeb culture and much more depth to the news.
Then home to my hole in the road where I was lucky to get a belt, a rusty belt, from me Dad etc.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
What's the point of winning if you can't gloat and rub your opponents' nose in it?
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
And it will reinforce the Corbynistas so bad news for Labour.
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
My favourite recent !!!! exchange concerned the BBC's East End white flight docu. A very vocal Lefty on Twitter called me/the Mail all sorts of predictable names. I took great delight in pointing out his ad hom outrage rather missed the point - it was a docu by his favourite broadcaster, and an article based on their own press release
Okay. I have to get back to work, but given your assertion about the press you will presumably concede then that, should Leave in fact win, your claim about the toppling of the dead tree press will have been proven wrong. I'll leave that without a question mark.
It's interesting that you write for the Mail press - we won't press you for details, but it's always useful to have insiders here.
The Mail generally does include some material from both sides of an argument, but the visceral impact is always more than clear. I don't think that even the most casual reader would be in doubt about their vehement position and selective, hostile treatment of Remainers. I do agree with you (and TSE) that it's an interesting test of the strength of (most of) the Tory press, either way.
By the way, someone downthread said the Star (no not the Morning Star) will be pro-Remain. Is that right?
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
What's the point of winning if you can't gloat and rub your opponents' nose in it?
The winner is on the up. But one day they will be slipping down the ladder and will need the help of those whose noses they rubbed in the dirt.
A fair stab at the issue TSE: 5/10. You missed some tricks but it's not too bad an attempt. The rather peremptory 'Tory press' tag is a little beneath you and 'political waterboarding' is a metaphor probably best reserved for House of Cards fiction. The horror of waterboarding bears no relation to anything in politics.
That aside, you have equated declining circulation of dead tree press with influence. They are not synonymous. We are influenced by the newspapers in many ways: they are viewed online and on newsstands. They still find their way into waiting rooms. They also help direct a meme to which responses are often required: in other words, they help hold politicians and others to account. Over matters such as tax havens, expenses and even piggies they have proved still to have considerable influence.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be:
Leave 55-59% Remain 40-45%
And before you lampoon this I called the General Election spot on.
The press may still have considerable influence; indeed, they do. Their influence on the electronic spoken media, which still have a deference to and inferiority complex towards, the written word remains powerful. The news channels still religiously cover the next day's front pages in the evening and then again the next morning, and the papers almost certainly play a significant part in setting those channels' (and networks') news agenda at the start of the day.
However, for all that, the dead tree press doesn't have the influence it once did. People don't read papers in the depth they did when they're reading on line, and they're more specific in what they'll read. If you skip straight to the 'entertainment and celebrity' section of the Main On Line then you'll see very little editorial, comment or heavy news.
Yes, papers are still visible in public places, whether waiting rooms, trains, newsstands or wherever, but a glance at a front page is little compensation for the whole thing being delivered through the letterbox.
Mr. Jonathan, I disagree with that fundamentally [for the record, I'm probably amongst the poorer of the site's contributors, so this isn't self-interest. Those who wish to throw money at me in return for excellent books can do so here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Thaddeus-White/e/B008C6RU98/ ]
By definition, wealthy people have a lot more disposable income. There's only so much you can spend on the basic needs (food, drink, shelter, clothing, fuel, transport). All else, ultimately, is extra.
The wealthy pay not only more in absolute but proportional terms, and their flimflam spending (new cars they don't necessarily need, for example) has a slice of VAT on top too.
If you wanted to make it so that people earning vast sums really felt it, you'd need to tax them to a massive, prohibitive, obscene degree. Those who could leave to a less Corbynite country would do so (and tax would fall to zero, from them). Those who could not flee would be miserable.
What matters is not financially harming individual wealthy people as much as possible, but maximising the overall tax take. That means taking a large slice but not so large it deters people from living, working and spending here.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
My favourite recent !!!! exchange concerned the BBC's East End white flight docu. A very vocal Lefty on Twitter called me/the Mail all sorts of predictable names. I took great delight in pointing out his ad hom outrage rather missed the point - it was a docu by his favourite broadcaster, and an article based on their own press release
No, the left thinks the BBC is as biased as the right does:
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
What's the point of winning if you can't gloat and rub your opponents' nose in it?
The winner is on the up. But one day they will be slipping down the ladder and will need the help of those whose noses they rubbed in the dirt.
I don't mind winners crowing. It would be nice if they did some thinking too, as you suggest.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
How we miss Charles Kennedy. Found dead a year ago today.
Okay. I have to get back to work, but given your assertion about the press you will presumably concede then that, should Leave in fact win, your claim about the toppling of the dead tree press will have been proven wrong. I'll leave that without a question mark.
It's interesting that you write for the Mail press - we won't press you for details, but it's always useful to have insiders here.
The Mail generally does include some material from both sides of an argument, but the visceral impact is always more than clear. I don't think that even the most casual reader would be in doubt about their vehement position and selective, hostile treatment of Remainers. I do agree with you (and TSE) that it's an interesting test of the strength of (most of) the Tory press, either way.
By the way, someone downthread said the Star (no not the Morning Star) will be pro-Remain. Is that right?
The Star backs Labour so almost certainly yes. The Times and FT of the Tory papers will back Remain, the Express is the most vehemently pro Leave having backed UKIP last May
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
No - feeling is not how one determines fairness.
If the poor should feel the effects of austerity shouldn't the better off, if we are all in this together?
LEAVE are saying that we should be able to abolish VAT on a couple of things that should probably be classified as essential (domestic fuel, sanitary products).
Instead of dealing with the substance of their very valid point - the EU is in the way - it seems that some REMAINERS are trying to deflect.
That implies to me that they know Leave are right and Remain are wrong on this issue.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
What's the point of winning if you can't gloat and rub your opponents' nose in it?
The winner is on the up. But one day they will be slipping down the ladder and will need the help of those whose noses they rubbed in the dirt.
I don't mind winners crowing. It would be nice if they did some thinking too, as you suggest.
Always be kind to those you use to get to the top. You may need a helping hand on thye way down.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
They probably became rich simply because they were cleverer than you or worked harder or took opportunities when presented who knows? Unlike you though I don't have a problem with someone who is successful and rich as a result.
If you have an issue then stand for election and change the world. However your present and past logic is why the left wing in general is so ignored, last century or probably more accurately the century before that.
Meanwhile the richest 10% still pay most of the tax. (Which keeps your tax down)
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
The right wing establishment - Remain and Leave - have made common cause in blaming immigration for many of the country's ills, while relying on bringing in working age immigrants and huge public spending cuts to hit the deficit reduction targets they have set. All that has happened now is that they have split over EU membership.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Estobar, the front page of the Mail claimed that remaining in the EU would put pensions in peril.
It did so on the basis of a proposal that has been specifically abandoned.
Aversions are sometimes founded on facts.
You claimed that the last sentence of the article admitted itself that it was wrong. It does absolutely nothing of the sort. The mendacious one there is you, my friend.
Have a good day.
"grudging granted a reprieve".
I'll let others decide who is being misleading.
A reprieve isn't an abandonment - and there's one final sentence in the article: "These plans may be resurrected if Britain stays in the EU."
Is this one of the things that has been delayed until June 24th when it's safe for Brussels to announce them as we're locked in because of our endorsement of the Project?
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
No - feeling is not how one determines fairness.
If the poor should feel the effects of austerity shouldn't the better off, if we are all in this together?
The burden should be fairly shared. But how that is assessed should not be determined by whether someone feels it or not but by how effectively the deficit is cut without - to the extent possible - harming the essential services e.g. cutting unnecessary duplicated administrative services or more efficient management rather than, say, sacking a care worker. Obviously, this is tremendously hard. But austerity should be about the efficient management of public money not about punishing this or that group of people.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Estobar, the front page of the Mail claimed that remaining in the EU would put pensions in peril.
It did so on the basis of a proposal that has been specifically abandoned.
Aversions are sometimes founded on facts.
You claimed that the last sentence of the article admitted itself that it was wrong. It does absolutely nothing of the sort. The mendacious one there is you, my friend.
Have a good day.
"grudging granted a reprieve".
I'll let others decide who is being misleading.
A reprieve isn't an abandonment - and there's one final sentence in the article: "These plans may be resurrected if Britain stays in the EU."
Is this one of the things that has been delayed until June 24th when it's safe for Brussels to announce them as we're locked in because of our endorsement of the Project?
No, this is one of those things where a decision has been taken not to proceed on that basis.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
As a knee-jerk anti-European IDS just needed to see Chirac and Schroeder being against it and Bush in favour. What Blair thought didn't enter his equation.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
My favourite recent !!!! exchange concerned the BBC's East End white flight docu. A very vocal Lefty on Twitter called me/the Mail all sorts of predictable names. I took great delight in pointing out his ad hom outrage rather missed the point - it was a docu by his favourite broadcaster, and an article based on their own press release
No, the left thinks the BBC is as biased as the right does:
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
Wouldn't they have given him exactly what they gave Blair? It would be a brave Leader of the Opposition to say that he disbelieved the security services. He'd have been excoriated.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
What's the point of winning if you can't gloat and rub your opponents' nose in it?
The winner is on the up. But one day they will be slipping down the ladder and will need the help of those whose noses they rubbed in the dirt.
You need to treat the two imposters just the same. Whichever side wins, it is clear that this debate has exposed a massive and sharp rift.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
My favourite recent !!!! exchange concerned the BBC's East End white flight docu. A very vocal Lefty on Twitter called me/the Mail all sorts of predictable names. I took great delight in pointing out his ad hom outrage rather missed the point - it was a docu by his favourite broadcaster, and an article based on their own press release
No, the left thinks the BBC is as biased as the right does:
Can't we just sell the Beeb to the Murdochs & have done with it?
The funny thing is - I can't find ANY comments on biasedBBC about right-wing bias. Is there a website detailing BBC right-wing (or should we call it 'extreme right wing') bias?
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
Wouldn't they have given him exactly what they gave Blair? It would be a brave Leader of the Opposition to say that he disbelieved the security services. He'd have been excoriated.
Blair and his team massaged what the security services gave him. I've no doubt that behind closed doors and meeting on close to the highest security clearances, the MI5/6 bosses would have made their reservations known.
That IDS was inclined to action anyway is beside the point; that's simply part of his failure.
It's good to see Tory Leavers now accept that the NHS is underfunded, incomes have collapsed, employment figures are a sham and there is a housing crisis. It's a shame, though, that they have done so little about tackling these issues and in many cases have exacerbated them.
Vapid something or other is the term, I believe.
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Estobar, the front page of the Mail claimed that remaining in the EU would put pensions in peril.
It did so on the basis of a proposal that has been specifically abandoned.
Aversions are sometimes founded on facts.
You claimed that the last sentence of the article admitted itself that it was wrong. It does absolutely nothing of the sort. The mendacious one there is you, my friend.
Have a good day.
"grudging granted a reprieve".
I'll let others decide who is being misleading.
A reprieve isn't an abandonment - and there's one final sentence in the article: "These plans may be resurrected if Britain stays in the EU."
Is this one of the things that has been delayed until June 24th when it's safe for Brussels to announce them as we're locked in because of our endorsement of the Project?
No, this is one of those things where a decision has been taken not to proceed on that basis.
For now.
Did you think nobody would read the linked article and discover that your claim about the last sentence of it was a flat untruth?
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
The worst thing that will happen following the vote, whatever the result, will be the gloating by the winning side, closely followed by the cries of rage/disbelief of the losing side.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
What's the point of winning if you can't gloat and rub your opponents' nose in it?
The winner is on the up. But one day they will be slipping down the ladder and will need the help of those whose noses they rubbed in the dirt.
You need to treat the two imposters just the same. Whichever side wins, it is clear that this debate has exposed a massive and sharp rift.
It's a stark clash of values. It's been fascinating and very revealing. Many on both sides simply can't comprehend the other's staunchly held positions.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Labour have churned out a lot of hyperbolic nonsense about these things, but the public are wise to the left's financial incontinence, and have seen that ever more money never seems to sort these things out so they have looked elsewhere for an answer.
They have concluded that it's the system. Excessive demand and poor allocation of resources.
Yes, you would say that, wouldn't you? :-)
The government - supported by Leavers - has made choices. The main one is to seek to eliminate the deficit by 2020. That has meant delivering significant cuts to public services and squeezing tax revenues. The least advantaged have borne the bulk of the cost on both fronts. I can see why blaming immigrants is more attractive for parts of the right, though.
In fiscal terms, the biggest percentage burden since 2010 has been borne by the richest 10% of taxpayers.
Pure sophistry, the richest 10% have experienced no hardship whatsoever.
Pure sophistry, bullshit. So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
I am sick to death of the rich lecturing the poor on their tough choices, when they haven't even had to make a "tough choice" in the Mercedes catalogue.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
No - feeling is not how one determines fairness.
If the poor should feel the effects of austerity shouldn't the better off, if we are all in this together?
The burden should be fairly shared. But how that is assessed should not be determined by whether someone feels it or not but by how effectively the deficit is cut without - to the extent possible - harming the essential services e.g. cutting unnecessary duplicated administrative services or more efficient management rather than, say, sacking a care worker. Obviously, this is tremendously hard. But austerity should be about the efficient management of public money not about punishing this or that group of people.
Efficiency in cutting the deficit and fairness in sharing the burden are surely entirely distinct concepts. It might, in theory, be most efficient to share the burden in a way that was manifestly unfair.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Ken Clarke as LOTO would have opposed the war.
Yes, he'd have expressed solidarity with France who had their own shoddy reasons for wanting Hussein kept in power.
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
My favourite recent !!!! exchange concerned the BBC's East End white flight docu. A very vocal Lefty on Twitter called me/the Mail all sorts of predictable names. I took great delight in pointing out his ad hom outrage rather missed the point - it was a docu by his favourite broadcaster, and an article based on their own press release
No, the left thinks the BBC is as biased as the right does:
Can't we just sell the Beeb to the Murdochs & have done with it?
The funny thing is - I can't find ANY comments on biasedBBC about right-wing bias. Is there a website detailing BBC right-wing (or should we call it 'extreme right wing') bias?
Try @medialens on Twitter (if you want to read some arrant bullshit, that is).
There is a corollary to this. If Leave lose, it will be a shattering defeat for the Conservative press, one from which their authority will not recover. You can't hammer away with the sheer mendacity that the Mail and the Express have shown in this campaign, lose and then retain a hold over politicians. The politicians will correctly conclude that the press can be bypassed.
Actually both stables (Mail and MoS) have printed some extremely good, thoughtful, articles on both sides of the fence. So you're really just spewing out your own innate prejudices.
The front page headline piece last Friday was a direct lie, as even the article itself admitted in its final sentence.
References please with links and backup for your assertion.
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
My favourite recent !!!! exchange concerned the BBC's East End white flight docu. A very vocal Lefty on Twitter called me/the Mail all sorts of predictable names. I took great delight in pointing out his ad hom outrage rather missed the point - it was a docu by his favourite broadcaster, and an article based on their own press release
No, the left thinks the BBC is as biased as the right does:
Can't we just sell the Beeb to the Murdochs & have done with it?
The funny thing is - I can't find ANY comments on biasedBBC about right-wing bias. Is there a website detailing BBC right-wing (or should we call it 'extreme right wing') bias?
Try @medialens on Twitter (if you want to read some arrant bullshit, that is).
Blair and his team massaged what the security services gave him. I've no doubt that behind closed doors and meeting on close to the highest security clearances, the MI5/6 bosses would have made their reservations known.
That IDS was inclined to action anyway is beside the point; that's simply part of his failure.
To bring this back to the topic, the Conservative press vilified anyone and everyone who was opposed to military action. The late Charles Kennedy was ridiculed on an almost daily basis as were the not inconsiderable numbers who attended the Anti-War marches in the spring of 2003.
It's true every Labour and Liberal Democrat leader has been attacked by the Press - Kinnock and Clegg especially but Major, IDS and now Cameron have had much the same. Apart from Margaret Thatcher, who is still held in a state of near-worship by some in the printed press (for obvious reasons), every prominent politician has endured some form of press onslaught over the years.
In a sense, Twitter continues this. Every spelling mistake, unfortunate juxtaposition of image or mispronunciation is immediately jumped on and becomes a 140-character tirade compounded by those who use re-tweeting as an excuse for not being able to formulate their own argument.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Not as such: that would have depended on internal US politics between State and Defense, the outcome of which wasn't known until the war was over.
However, he could have withheld his support, pending assurances about the post-war situation (this was more clearly a failure of the likes of Clare Short).
@ThreeQuidder The article writers knew that the proposal had been ruled out, as the last line shows. They did their level best to conceal it while getting the bare facts out there.
I have explained to you their deception. If you don't like the fact that the Mail has been thoroughly disingenuous on this story, take it out on them not me.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Ken Clarke as LOTO would have opposed the war.
Yes, he'd have expressed solidarity with France who had their own shoddy reasons for wanting Hussein kept in power.
@ThreeQuidder The article writers knew that the proposal had been ruled out, as the last line shows. They did their level best to conceal it while getting the bare facts out there.
I have explained to you their deception. If you don't like the fact that the Mail has been thoroughly disingenuous on this story, take it out on them not me.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Ken Clarke as LOTO would have opposed the war.
Yes, he'd have expressed solidarity with France who had their own shoddy reasons for wanting Hussein kept in power.
So Ken was right and IDS wrong.
IDS wrong then, wrong now.
You must be happy being on the same side as Gerry Adams.
They probably became rich simply because they were cleverer than you or worked harder or took opportunities when presented who knows? Unlike you though I don't have a problem with someone who is successful and rich as a result.
In my experience there is little to no correlation between talent, hard work and wealth. No-one got rich without luck and help from others. People who work-hard and are talented outnumber the rich 1000 to 1.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Ken Clarke as LOTO would have opposed the war.
Yes, he'd have expressed solidarity with France who had their own shoddy reasons for wanting Hussein kept in power.
So Ken was right and IDS wrong.
IDS wrong then, wrong now.
You must be happy being on the same side as Gerry Adams.
@ThreeQuidder I absolutely did not. It seems, however, that even after a careful explanation you are unable to see that.
No, you absolutely did.(*)
You said that the article says the proposal has been abandoned. It does not. It says that Brussels has reluctantly granted a reprieve. A reprieve is by definition temporary, an abandonment permanent.
(*) Well, either that or you misread or misunderstood the article. But as you are a highly-paid successful lawyer, I know which I think is most likely.
Mr. Eagles, it's unsurprising to find anti-Conservative sentiment in the People's Republic of South Yorkshire (about as shocking as finding Conservative voters in North Yorkshire).
It's West Yorkshire, and places like it, that may be the determining factor. Full of marginals and more voters accustomed to being floating voters.
Also worth noting those who are anti-Conservative may vote Leave to try and get rid of Cameron.
They probably became rich simply because they were cleverer than you or worked harder or took opportunities when presented who knows? Unlike you though I don't have a problem with someone who is successful and rich as a result.
In my experience there is little to no correlation between talent, hard work and wealth. No-one got rich* without luck and help from others. People who work-hard and are talented outnumber the rich 1000 to 1.
What cannot easily been gainsaid is that this is an onslaught unlike anything seen in the last fifty years. Not even the Welsh Windbag endured this level of sustained attack. I cannot see how Remain can survive this and now expect the final referendum result to be: .
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
Can Blair's reputation fall further? It may re-energise some of the hate, can't see what more Chilcott can throw at him - we know all the Big Fibs. The other names are all has beens.
IDS, IIRC was enthusiastically in support of the Iraq expedition.
Trouble is everyone who voted for it can claim that they were beguiled into supporting the war by Blair's hypnotic abilities.
IDS can't. He was leader of the Opposition and could - and should - have asked for a full briefing direct from the security services. It was his job *not* to take the PM at his word.
I wanted Hussein removed if and only if there was a proper plan in place for what happened afterwards.
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Ken Clarke as LOTO would have opposed the war.
Yes, he'd have expressed solidarity with France who had their own shoddy reasons for wanting Hussein kept in power.
So Ken was right and IDS wrong.
IDS wrong then, wrong now.
You must be happy being on the same side as Gerry Adams.
You're on the same side as George Galloway.
I salute your courage, your indefatigability etc
Well, indeed. With two odious creatures like that, one on each side, it's stupid to decide how to vote based on who backs what.
Mr. Eagles, it's unsurprising to find anti-Conservative sentiment in the People's Republic of South Yorkshire (about as shocking as finding Conservative voters in North Yorkshire).
It's West Yorkshire, and places like it, that may be the determining factor. Full of marginals and more voters accustomed to being floating voters.
Also worth noting those who are anti-Conservative may vote Leave to try and get rid of Cameron.
I'm coming to West Yorkshire next week. I was a hit last year there helping to elect several Tory MPs. I might come canvass you.
I firmly believe that whatever the outcome, the Tory party will be in a very bad place once the dust has settled in late June. There's just no way they can all shake hands, congratulate the winner and get back to normal. Things have been said and done that just can't be ignored or forgiven. Labour under Corbyn might just be playing a very clever game by keeping quiet on the EU.
I think as a generality the less Corbyn says or does the better he is thought of. The old saying of a fool being better to remain silent is apposite.
But yes, we are heading for an unstable minority government which will be unable to implement its legislative program and will struggle to even pass a budget. I agree with Southam that an election before 2020 looks inevitable. The only question is how long the remnants of this government will seek to hang on.
All this is very bad news for Brexit negotiations too. The Commission and the member states will see a divided government that cannot get legislation through Parliament and wonder how on earth any kind of meaningful deal can be done. If we do vote to leave then a GE surely becomes inevitable.
@AlastairMeeks was drawing our attention to some rather tasty odds for elections in 2016 and 2017 a couple of days ago. I don't see a stable government in either a remain or a leave scenario. The winning side will set the manifesto for the next election for the Conservative party and those on the other side will have to decide whether they can reconcile themselves to that or not.
Hard to disagree with that. I find it hard to see a GE this year or next without the Government backing a vote of no confidence in itself, or repealing the FTPA and then calling one, and I'd expect the Tories to lose their majority if they did.
However, I am happy with my 7/1 bet on Cameron leaving office by the end of this year.
Blair and his team massaged what the security services gave him. I've no doubt that behind closed doors and meeting on close to the highest security clearances, the MI5/6 bosses would have made their reservations known.
That IDS was inclined to action anyway is beside the point; that's simply part of his failure.
To bring this back to the topic, the Conservative press vilified anyone and everyone who was opposed to military action. The late Charles Kennedy was ridiculed on an almost daily basis as were the not inconsiderable numbers who attended the Anti-War marches in the spring of 2003.
It's true every Labour and Liberal Democrat leader has been attacked by the Press - Kinnock and Clegg especially but Major, IDS and now Cameron have had much the same. Apart from Margaret Thatcher, who is still held in a state of near-worship by some in the printed press (for obvious reasons), every prominent politician has endured some form of press onslaught over the years.
In a sense, Twitter continues this. Every spelling mistake, unfortunate juxtaposition of image or mispronunciation is immediately jumped on and becomes a 140-character tirade compounded by those who use re-tweeting as an excuse for not being able to formulate their own argument.
And your point is?
Kennedy's opposition to the Iraq War did his public standing no harm - a fact he was well aware of and which the Lib Dems used in campaigning.
And yes, Twitter bullies just like the press bully, though the most active and angry on social media tend to be the left rather than the right. That said, the influence of grass-roots activity on social media to change votes is probably still very much unproven.
I said that the article admitted that the premise was untrue.
In the final paragraph (not the final sentence as I originally said, my mistake), the article states that the EU had "grudging granted a reprieve". This wording, though ambiguous, is expressly intended to reference the fact that the proposal has in fact been abandoned. The final sentence is just covering fire - the proposal could equally well be introduced in Britain after a Leave vote.
Now, let's have another look at that headline: "why staying in Europe could harm your pension". The entire article is based around a proposal which has now been abandoned, as the authors clearly knew from their own words and as those who knew the facts would understand.
So yes, I feel my original statement was (bar the slip of "sentence" for "paragraph") an entirely fair summary.
Also worth noting those who are anti-Conservative may vote Leave to try and get rid of Cameron.
I'm surprised more on the left don't make more of this angle. Corbyn has been all but silent during the campaign. A Leave vote would overnight destroy Dave and Osborne and plunge the Tories into a sort of chaos. No doubt order would emerge with someone like Gove as PM - but that must be electorally good for Labour.
Comments
LOL you think this is bad.......wait until the EU referendum is over and the Chilcott report is published. The sh*t will hit the fan. What the press will do to one Anthony Charles Lynton Blair will make the demonisation of Neil Kinnock seem like friendly banter.
On the substance, depends on the context, though I'd have thought that whereas Brooke prevented some of Churchill's wilder notions, I get the impression that it's Osborne who's been ideologically adventurous.
I'm not sure that the historical parallel is all that exact (though they never are so i wouldn't worry that excessively): Halifax had been packed off to the US by the time Churchill came to work with Brooke, I think?
Alastair, go and put the kettle on and have a cuppa. You're really not writing at the moment about the EU debate but your general aversion to the Mail, in both its forms.
Bar nonsense like spaceports and reannounced fluff, either Cameron has run out of ideas pretty early - or he's cleared the decks just-in-case.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3613559/Why-staying-Europe-harm-pension-Experts-contradict-Osborne-s-claim-retirees-lose-Brexit.html
It did so on the basis of a proposal that has been specifically abandoned.
Aversions are sometimes founded on facts.
sophistry, bullshit.So basically unless you suffered some hardship the tax however high and total amount you pay really doesn't count...... because you didn't suffer hardship
Have a good day.
I'll let others decide who is being misleading.
As you well know, the press tends to play to its audience. Anything else is an indulgence. I buy one newspaper a week (Sunday), but tend to read them otherwise ... waiting rooms, trains, buses, and pick up a little vicarious knowledge from the press reviews.
I remember the Mirror being an interesting read many years ago before it gave in to celeb culture. In 1962/63, when I started as a paper boy I delivered loads of Expresses, a lot of Mirrors, a few Mails, and one Times (the owner of Jakeman's sweets). The Sun hadn't been born.
Not necessarily typical, but I used to read them on the way round - when I wasn't falling over as it was an icy winter. Hardly a article about celeb culture and much more depth to the news.
Then home to my hole in the road where I was lucky to get a belt, a rusty belt, from me Dad etc.
What would be nice would be a period of sober reflection on the consequences. The chances of that happening? Somewhere near zero, I expect.
I'm glad I will be on holiday in Italy then.
Yes, a key test on whether you are carrying your fair share of the burden is that you feel it. If you don't, you're not.
The Mail generally does include some material from both sides of an argument, but the visceral impact is always more than clear. I don't think that even the most casual reader would be in doubt about their vehement position and selective, hostile treatment of Remainers. I do agree with you (and TSE) that it's an interesting test of the strength of (most of) the Tory press, either way.
By the way, someone downthread said the Star (no not the Morning Star) will be pro-Remain. Is that right?
However, for all that, the dead tree press doesn't have the influence it once did. People don't read papers in the depth they did when they're reading on line, and they're more specific in what they'll read. If you skip straight to the 'entertainment and celebrity' section of the Main On Line then you'll see very little editorial, comment or heavy news.
Yes, papers are still visible in public places, whether waiting rooms, trains, newsstands or wherever, but a glance at a front page is little compensation for the whole thing being delivered through the letterbox.
By definition, wealthy people have a lot more disposable income. There's only so much you can spend on the basic needs (food, drink, shelter, clothing, fuel, transport). All else, ultimately, is extra.
The wealthy pay not only more in absolute but proportional terms, and their flimflam spending (new cars they don't necessarily need, for example) has a slice of VAT on top too.
If you wanted to make it so that people earning vast sums really felt it, you'd need to tax them to a massive, prohibitive, obscene degree. Those who could leave to a less Corbynite country would do so (and tax would fall to zero, from them). Those who could not flee would be miserable.
What matters is not financially harming individual wealthy people as much as possible, but maximising the overall tax take. That means taking a large slice but not so large it deters people from living, working and spending here.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/01/jeremy-corbyn-bbc-obsessed-damaging-leadership-vice-documentary
LEAVE are saying that we should be able to abolish VAT on a couple of things that should probably be classified as essential (domestic fuel, sanitary products).
Instead of dealing with the substance of their very valid point - the EU is in the way - it seems that some REMAINERS are trying to deflect.
That implies to me that they know Leave are right and Remain are wrong on this issue.
Does this mean TSE is expecting a LEAVE result?
If you have an issue then stand for election and change the world. However your present and past logic is why the left wing in general is so ignored, last century or probably more accurately the century before that.
Meanwhile the richest 10% still pay most of the tax. (Which keeps your tax down)
Is this one of the things that has been delayed until June 24th when it's safe for Brussels to announce them as we're locked in because of our endorsement of the Project?
That IDS was inclined to action anyway is beside the point; that's simply part of his failure.
'Social mobility has come to a halt'
http://tinyurl.com/gvhy5uv
Could IDS - or any LOTO - have learnt that there wasn't?
Did you think nobody would read the linked article and discover that your claim about the last sentence of it was a flat untruth?
IDS, wrong then, wrong now.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/81371/IDS-raps-Blair-for-lying.html Blair in truth shock?
Immigration the major issue, but IDS is putting off Labour voters inclined to Leave.
No one believes the Tory leavers will spend the £350 million a week on the NHS, they just want to privatise it.
If Leave win, I promise not to gloat. If Remain win, I promise not to emigrate.
There, that's all bases covered.
It's true every Labour and Liberal Democrat leader has been attacked by the Press - Kinnock and Clegg especially but Major, IDS and now Cameron have had much the same. Apart from Margaret Thatcher, who is still held in a state of near-worship by some in the printed press (for obvious reasons), every prominent politician has endured some form of press onslaught over the years.
In a sense, Twitter continues this. Every spelling mistake, unfortunate juxtaposition of image or mispronunciation is immediately jumped on and becomes a 140-character tirade compounded by those who use re-tweeting as an excuse for not being able to formulate their own argument.
Sure, it's not the same as writing a number one bestseller, but it's still something I can be @SeanT style smug about.
And so I will.
However, he could have withheld his support, pending assurances about the post-war situation (this was more clearly a failure of the likes of Clare Short).
I have explained to you their deception. If you don't like the fact that the Mail has been thoroughly disingenuous on this story, take it out on them not me.
IDS wrong then, wrong now.
I salute your courage, your indefatigability etc
You said that the article says the proposal has been abandoned. It does not. It says that Brussels has reluctantly granted a reprieve. A reprieve is by definition temporary, an abandonment permanent.
(*) Well, either that or you misread or misunderstood the article. But as you are a highly-paid successful lawyer, I know which I think is most likely.
It's West Yorkshire, and places like it, that may be the determining factor. Full of marginals and more voters accustomed to being floating voters.
Also worth noting those who are anti-Conservative may vote Leave to try and get rid of Cameron.
Eastern Europe - 1989
"If we leave the Soviet Union, we might have to get visas to visit Siberia and turnips will be more expensive"
However, I am happy with my 7/1 bet on Cameron leaving office by the end of this year.
Kennedy's opposition to the Iraq War did his public standing no harm - a fact he was well aware of and which the Lib Dems used in campaigning.
And yes, Twitter bullies just like the press bully, though the most active and angry on social media tend to be the left rather than the right. That said, the influence of grass-roots activity on social media to change votes is probably still very much unproven.
I said that the article admitted that the premise was untrue.
In the final paragraph (not the final sentence as I originally said, my mistake), the article states that the EU had "grudging granted a reprieve". This wording, though ambiguous, is expressly intended to reference the fact that the proposal has in fact been abandoned. The final sentence is just covering fire - the proposal could equally well be introduced in Britain after a Leave vote.
Now, let's have another look at that headline: "why staying in Europe could harm your pension". The entire article is based around a proposal which has now been abandoned, as the authors clearly knew from their own words and as those who knew the facts would understand.
So yes, I feel my original statement was (bar the slip of "sentence" for "paragraph") an entirely fair summary.
No one will watch Gove tomorrow night.
The big one is the Wembley debate.
Vote LEAVE to destroy Cameron and the Tories
I may well set the hound upon you (she really likes visitors and is about as subtle as a nymphomaniac rhinoceros).