!!! The phony war? What do you want in payment of this "debt"? Archangel?
The period after the fall of France was hardly phony...
True the Battle of Britain wasn't phony, but I can't see why Russia owes Britain a debt for that.
Without us there would have been no two-front war in Europe and the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis.
Oh, gosh. That is a very big statement Mr. Glenn. The strategic initiative on the Eastern Front shifted irrevocably to the Soviets at Kursk in July 1943, nearly a full year before the second front opened. Even if you take in the Western Allies bombing offensive (which really didn't get into top gear until well after Kursk), I think there is very little evidence that supports the contention it was a two front war that stopped USSR falling to the Nazis.
I think he's right. Because the UK wasn't knocked out the Wehrmacht had to station at least a quarter of its strength in France and Norway, and divert substantial resources to a submarine and strategic air war. Later, our involvement and the Royal Navy made lend-lease convoys to the USSR feasible.
I think the USSR might have politically collapsed in 1941/1942 if we'd been neutral or defeated.
Out if interest has there been any "market mayhem" from yesterdays polls?
Didn't you see? The pound TANKED yesterday afternoon to....errr....as Robert kindly told us, exactly where it was on opening yesterday.
FTSE 100 down .9% today to below 6,000. A few days ago it was around 6,300.
While the FTSE's machinations are fascinating, it'll do you no harm to look at the five year performance of the FTSE. It's as much about commodity cycles as it is about Brexit shenanigans, though it's naturally a worry. It started the year @ around 5.8k and has been sloshing around ever since.
It's not often that it sinks 1 percent or more for a number of days in a row. It's likely that the possibility of Brexit may have contributed to that.
The market is forward looking - I think it's discounting what it perceives the Brexit result will be and how the flock will react. If your investing horizon stretches more than a month or two then I would suggest sitting pat until post Brexit. If we are leaving it'll take us years to do so and if we remain markets will bounce.
My incredibly secret and sophisticated investment strategy is based on 'it's an ill will that blows nobody any good'. Don't tell anyone, that's just between us, right?
Differential turnout will help Remain significantly, I would've thought.
Quite intrigued to see how this goes.
Mr Dancer, I think it will be even more exciting than Election Night last year!
By what time are we expecting something close to a result?
Trying to decide whether to go to sleep and wake early, or to stay up the whole night. I'm three hours ahead of the UK so the polls close at 1am, alternatively I could wake up at 6am (3am) and watch from there.
At least, unlike the GE, there won't be loads of bets to make and wrong positions to undo, 1/8 on NOM, free money we all thought!
My polling district (Lancaster) is due to declare around 3.30am, but I've read somewhere a prediction that the BBC won't even think about calling it before 5am....
Attractive article, written with Cyclefree's usual verve and fluency.
But the conclusions are in my view mistaken, and, more important, have no chance of acceptance on the Continent. British exceptionalism is seen as all right up to a point (World War II, ancient Parliament, freedom of speech) but vastly overrated in the modern era, where other democracies work more constructively, other economies work better and other political classes are, frankly, less up themselves than the British.
How exactly do the other economies "work better"?
Unemployment rate: UK 5.4% Eurozone 11.0%
Youth Unemployment Rate: UK 13.2% Eurozone 21.2%
Participation Ratio UK 78.3% Eurozone 56.8%
Nick believes that Germany = the EU. That's really the only economy in the EU which works better than ours overall, though they are helped hugely by an undervalued currency. The DM would be trading at parity with Sterling, if not slightly stronger.
I think Germany outperformed the UK when the DM was a lot stronger than the £. Economies tend to work well if they are well-manged both privately and publicly. Over-reliance on the exchange rate to sell your goods is very dangerous.
No they didn't, and when the advantage is structural it isn't very dangerous.
I think we must agree to differ - but I remember the 70-90s rather well.
I'm looking at the World Bank data and you're empirically wrong. Cumulative UK growth per capita since 1970 is 86.58%, for Germany it is 84.11% since 1970.
So you're saying that the German economy is now smaller than the UK economy or that at some point in that period we have begun slowly to catch up - I wonder how much of the is since we joined the EU
Are you thick? Over the same time period our per capita growth has been largely identical to Germany's per capita growth. Comparing absolute values is completely pointless because Germany has a 25% larger population.
No need to be rude. Only since the DDR was absorbed. The figures you quote do not show change over the period a point you choose to ignore. Incidentally also worth remembering that such growth has occurred during both the period of EU membership and relatively high levels of immigration - both of which Leave want to end. Funny that.
Again, it covers the whole period, and it uses per capita growth which eliminates the effect of immigration.
!!! The phony war? What do you want in payment of this "debt"? Archangel?
The period after the fall of France was hardly phony...
True the Battle of Britain wasn't phony, but I can't see why Russia owes Britain a debt for that.
Without us there would have been no two-front war in Europe and the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis.
Oh, gosh. That is a very big statement Mr. Glenn. The strategic initiative on the Eastern Front shifted irrevocably to the Soviets at Kursk in July 1943, nearly a full year before the second front opened. Even if you take in the Western Allies bombing offensive (which really didn't get into top gear until well after Kursk), I think there is very little evidence that supports the contention it was a two front war that stopped USSR falling to the Nazis.
I think he's right. Because the UK wasn't knocked out the Wehrmacht had to station at least a quarter of its strength in France and Norway, and divert substantial resources to a submarine and strategic air war. Later, our involvement and the Royal Navy made lend-lease convoys to the USSR feasible.
I think the USSR might have politically collapsed in 1941/1942 if we'd been neutral or defeated.
Also, in December 41, the Japanese decided on their "southern" SE Asia strategy against the Western colonial possessions, rather then their "northern" strategy against Russia. The Soviets and Japanese had a neutrality pact in effect from 1941 to August 1945.
When watching TV coverage place it horizontally on the screen. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are below the line, this means Leave is winning. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are above the line, it means Remain is winning
When watching TV coverage place it horizontally on the screen. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are below the line, this means Leave is winning. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are above the line, it means Remain is winning
Edited extra bit: needed*
The way it is going there wasn't be any champagne corks popping next week...
When watching TV coverage place it horizontally on the screen. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are below the line, this means Leave is winning. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are above the line, it means Remain is winning
Thanks Cyclefree - although I think you underplay quite how divided our own nation will be after a Brexit vote, and the internal debates which will rage on. I'm far from convinced that Remainers will be hard to find a few months after the vote, particularly once some of the nonsense from the Leave campaigns doesn't survive reality.
I read Alastair Meeks' howl of frustration last night which got a big reaction. On one level I was with him, but I couldn't summon up enough enthusiasm for the EU to be furious with my fellow men; the flaws with the EU are manifest but I still can't see how leaving does anything other than damage ourselves. I think the campaign has brought out the worst in Britain - but if we do leave the argument for working internationally has a blank canvass, and there will be better images to put on it than the worst of Leave and Remain.
I've noin.....
I think you're right - either way next week is going to reveal a nation divided - quite bitterly and actually much more so than most of the politicians on both sides, which is why the compromise we'll end up with is going to annoy a huge number of voters.
It's so much easier to be 'against' things than responsible for delivering them - I fear the anger may be even greater when Leave campaigners are forced into the world of compromises, deals, and having to be accountable in favour of their brave new world.
Yep - Leave on Leave is going to be nasty; way nastier than what we have had in this campaign.
A scary thought. It will certainly be vicious if things go wrong, but nastier than now?
Cyclefree is really out-doing all superlatives, just another wonderful, wonderful article.
I think quite a modest amount of flexibility on the part of the EU would have persuaded enough Reluctant Leavers to be Reluctant Remainers.
I agree completely with your critique of Ms Cyclefree's piece and her previous contributions, and your succinct postscript.
Between them Cameron and the EU look like, between them, they are losing an unlosable referendum for precisely the reasons outlined by Ms C. The only bad luck involved is that they've caught a huge anti-establishment wave and the anti EU momentum will only be lost when the EU implodes; Brexit will doubtless accelerate that circumstance. There seems so other outcome possible.
An excellent article by Ms C.
The question in my head is about timing. Why did Cameron rush to the referendum, when he could have taken up to another 2 years? With more time he could have negotiated a better deal. He could have waited until after the French election next year, which I suspect will result in even tougher questions for the EU (and serve as a 'useful' warning against extremism). He could have used the channels of the establishment more subtly to lay a foundation for a remain vote. He could even have agreed 'lines of attack' with Labour.
What was the rush? Early retirement?
The rush was the issues which magnified the EU's negatives like migration crises, Greek crises etc etc grow more likely the more time is spent discussing it. Apparently a rush job wsa felt to have a better chance than a longer negotiation which would still have attracted criticism and which might not be as effective anyway despite being better depending on what crises occurred in the interim.
I find a lot of what Cameron has done and how makes a great deal of sense from his perspective, even if it has not in the least worked out it seems or other options were better.
Attractive article, written with Cyclefree's usual verve and fluency.
But the conclusions are in my view mistaken, and, more important, have no chance of acceptance on the Continent. British exceptionalism is seen as all right up to a point (World War II, ancient Parliament, freedom of speech) but vastly overrated in the modern era, where other democracies work more constructively, other economies work better and other political classes are, frankly, less up themselves than the British.
There are 28 members, one of which is contemplating walking out against the advice of the majority of its own elected leaders of nearly all persuasions. It's going to be seen as a Trump-like populist revolt, to be treated with the same mixture of revulsion and resigned tolerance that we will treat a possible President Trump.
That's not a reason to accept their view - sure, they might all be wrong. But it's important that we don't kid ourselves into thinking that we can walk out, turn round and get an understanding reception. It'll be difficult and unpleasant and severe damage will result. If we think that it's nonetheless worth it, so we can be "free" of European consensus, so be it. But it's important not to hope to wreck a marriage and then be good friends. It doesn't usually happen..
Yep, I think this is largely true. But I don't think that people on the continent take time to understand how and why we are different. It is a very, very British (English) trait to react very badly if you perceive you are being told what to do by foreigners. For good or ill that has been the way it is for centuries, and the events of the 20th century only reinforced to us that we were right. If the UK is to play a full part in Europe, then it does have to be treated differently and the Europeans need to accept that. The tone of voice is extremely important.
That said, I also think we need to be very wary about looking for equivalents to our perspective elsewhere. Anyone believing that Ireland might follow us out of the EU at some stage clearly knows absolutely nothing about Irish history or the very strong cultural and emotional links that Ireland has with Catholic southern Europe.
I wonder if you are not touching on a truth that De Gaulle recognised but which has been suppressed for many years. The Brits just do not belong in a European project, we stand apart from Europe always have done and always will.
We trade, of course, but we do not fit in. Our whole cultural heritage is not not the same. We do not have the shared experience of other European nations (mostly of being ruled by the Germans or the French), our legal system is different, our relationship with the state is different.
Why would we want anyone else to follow us out of Europe? We're not trying to form a gang. I take the point that the EU has raised fudge and muddle to an art form - to its detriment.
While I'll happily own that Britain has sometimes been its own worst enemy in dealing with our European partners, surely the majority of the ills in the EU today lie firmly at the door of the half-baked integration of the Eurozone, which has become an institutionalized system of beggar-thy-neighbour.
If it works for Europe to have 27, 31 or more countries in the EU, more power to them. The sooner the Eurozone pursues full monetary union the better. I cannot see good resulting from the current stasis.
But will the German taxpayer countenance the fiscal transfers that full monetary union would have to entail to be stable? Don't see it happening myself - the Germans want their cake and to eat it.
When watching TV coverage place it horizontally on the screen. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are below the line, this means Leave is winning. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are above the line, it means Remain is winning
For all the talk of Labour voters shifting to Leave, for me the real story from TNS is:
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
I'm really not sure I believe that. it's absolutely contrary to everything that has gone before. - What's the sample size I wonder and therefore the +/- margin of error?
Another massive lead for Leave. It may not be over, but where. Is the Remain win going to come from when Labour, Wales and other areas that need to be very highly Remain, are not as firm as predicted? Just how many will need to hesitate at the last second and switch from Leave to Remain? It's getting to be a lot, and you don't want to be relying on that.
BBC covering Tom Watson saying EU migration rules need to change is good for leave, just reminds people about immigration and they know which side will deal best with that.
David Cameron's ammunition doesn't have the usual weapons that the newspapers provided for him say back in GE2015. Doesn't particularly matter if the scare stories are true or not, the great British public doesn't believe him any more. The wolf did eventually come, mind...
I was thinking if there was to be a "vow" it couldn't be Cameron as he has no way to enforce it. It would have to be Merkel, Tusk and Junker coming to London. I can't see what they could offer though as free movement of people is not on the table.
Another massive lead for Leave. It may not be over, but where. Is the Remain win going to come from when Labour, Wales and other areas that need to be very highly Remain, are not as firm as predicted? Just how many will need to hesitate at the last second and switch from Leave to Remain? It's getting to be a lot, and you don't want to be relying on that.
Hold the presses Tom Watson has said we need to get the eu to reform immigration rules...I am sure that will shift millions of labour voters back to remain...
London, 14th June - The latest EU referendum voting intention survey by TNS gives the Leave campaign a significant lead nine days out from polling day.
The survey of 2,497 adults in the UK gives the ‘Leave’ campaign a lead of 7 points over ‘Remain’. Voting intention among likely voters (including those not fully decided but leaning in one direction) is as follows:
Remain 40%, Leave 47%, Undecided/Would not vote 13%
The notes seem to suggest that only two thirds of the country are concrete pledges.
"It should be noted that among the entire general public the picture is more balanced with 33% supporting Remain, 35% supporting Leave and 32% undecided or planning not to vote."
The number of don't knows in TNS seems awfully high.
Also, if true, it looks like the very young will fail to turn out decisively, yet again.
What the hell is wrong with young people if they won't turn out even for this? I voted eagerly at my first opportunity in 2005, and even if one doesn't like politicians this is important!
For all the talk of Labour voters shifting to Leave, for me the real story from TNS is:
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
I'm really not sure I believe that. it's absolutely contrary to everything that has gone before. - What's the sample size I wonder and therefore the +/- margin of error?
I'm not sure why it's contrary. After all these voters were Labour supporters about 4 years ago, and we know how they're (alleged) to be voting.
David Cameron's ammunition doesn't have the usual weapons that the newspapers provided for him say back in GE2015. Doesn't particularly matter if the scare stories are true or not, the great British public doesn't believe him any more. The wolf did eventually come, mind...
I was thinking if there was to be a "vow" it couldn't be Cameron as he has no way to enforce it. It would have to be Merkel, Tusk and Junker coming to London. I can't see what they could offer though as free movement of people is not on the table.
Since Ed's pioneering effort with the Ed-stone, we expect our Vows to be carved in rock.
So, it needs Merkel, Tusk, Junker and a 5-tonne slab of Carrara Marble.
Differential turnout will help Remain significantly, I would've thought.
Quite intrigued to see how this goes.
Mr Dancer, I think it will be even more exciting than Election Night last year!
By what time are we expecting something close to a result?
Trying to decide whether to go to sleep and wake early, or to stay up the whole night. I'm three hours ahead of the UK so the polls close at 1am, alternatively I could wake up at 6am (3am) and watch from there.
At least, unlike the GE, there won't be loads of bets to make and wrong positions to undo, 1/8 on NOM, free money we all thought!
My polling district (Lancaster) is due to declare around 3.30am, but I've read somewhere a prediction that the BBC won't even think about calling it before 5am....
Okay thanks. Might go for the sleep and get up early option then!
BBC covering Tom Watson saying EU migration rules need to change is good for leave, just reminds people about immigration and they know which side will deal best with that.
Sounds more like maouvreing for the top Labour job, than a serious proposal.
London, 14th June - The latest EU referendum voting intention survey by TNS gives the Leave campaign a significant lead nine days out from polling day.
The survey of 2,497 adults in the UK gives the ‘Leave’ campaign a lead of 7 points over ‘Remain’. Voting intention among likely voters (including those not fully decided but leaning in one direction) is as follows:
Remain 40%, Leave 47%, Undecided/Would not vote 13%
The notes seem to suggest that only two thirds of the country are concrete pledges.
"It should be noted that among the entire general public the picture is more balanced with 33% supporting Remain, 35% supporting Leave and 32% undecided or planning not to vote."
All to play for?
Two-thirds is going to be about the turnout rate (65-70%) so probably not that much to play for, unless, as in Sindyref, turnover goes well over 70%.
Regarding the betting, you have to remember how long Trump remained for a long time although he was clearly the front runner for the GOP nomination.
Mainly because punters thought that something had to happen to stop him, and couldn't get their head around that he would win.
A similar thing might be happening here. all the 'evidence' is pointing one way, but the odds don't reflect it yet, becuase people can't beleive that it will actually happen.
For all the talk of Labour voters shifting to Leave, for me the real story from TNS is:
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
I'm really not sure I believe that. it's absolutely contrary to everything that has gone before. - What's the sample size I wonder and therefore the +/- margin of error?
I'm not sure why it's contrary. After all these voters were Labour supporters about 4 years ago, and we know how they're (alleged) to be voting.
And a lot of the arguments heard by those Labour voters in the Stoke video from earlier, are VERY similar to the arguments a lot of Labour "Yes" voters in Scotland were making.
!!! The phony war? What do you want in payment of this "debt"? Archangel?
The period after the fall of France was hardly phony...
True the Battle of Britain wasn't phony, but I can't see why Russia owes Britain a debt for that.
Without us there would have been no two-front war in Europe and the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis.
The USSR would have kicked Germany's arse with or without us. It's one of my specialist subjects . The only scenario in which I imagine Germany winning would be if it had launched Barbarossa in early May '41. It was Yugoslavia and the Balkans that screwed Hitler. Had he taken Moscow and Leningrad in '41, he might have forced a capitulation.
How well could Russia have fought without the Western weapons? Serious question, I don't know how critical US and UK supplies were in those critical months of Leningrad and Stalingrad.
Had Hitler secured the caucus oilfields, taken St Petersburg and cut the supply lines from Murmansk/Archangel to Moscow, I imagine it would have been far harder for the Soviet army to resist and counterattack. The key, then, would be German supply lines and ability to hold territory.
What is very clear is that pollsters cannot in current climate embargo polls as TNS sought to do
Why do they even try, is it a legacy from when the poll would be published by a newspaper with 1,000 words of editorial around it? Surely send the embargoed poll to only a couple of people that really need to see it, then send the press release out to everyone at the publication time.
What is very clear is that pollsters cannot in current climate embargo polls as TNS sought to do
Why do they even try, it it a legacy from when the poll would be published by a newspaper with 1,000 words of editorial around it? Surely send the embargoed poll to only a couple of people that really need to see it, then send the press release out to everyone at the publication time.
I'm coming to Pulpstar's point of view on embargoed polling.
Treat them like insider trading.
In the past the pollster has chosen to end the embargo at the optimal point for them to get the best coverage.
Anecdote, I have a retail shop in the Ellesmere Port area on the Wirral. The window cleaner who has been a long standing resident for decades has just told me he does not know anyone voting remain, everyone is voting out. WWC Labour heartland
Anecdote, I have a retail shop in the Ellesmere Port area on the Wirral. The window cleaner who has been a long standing resident for decades has just told me he does not know anyone voting remain, everyone is voting out. WWC Labour heartland
:O :O Didn't think PB would have anyone else from the Port.
London, 14th June - The latest EU referendum voting intention survey by TNS gives the Leave campaign a significant lead nine days out from polling day.
The survey of 2,497 adults in the UK gives the ‘Leave’ campaign a lead of 7 points over ‘Remain’. Voting intention among likely voters (including those not fully decided but leaning in one direction) is as follows:
Remain 40%, Leave 47%, Undecided/Would not vote 13%
The notes seem to suggest that only two thirds of the country are concrete pledges.
"It should be noted that among the entire general public the picture is more balanced with 33% supporting Remain, 35% supporting Leave and 32% undecided or planning not to vote."
All to play for?
There are absolutely loads of DKs in this sample – hundreds of the devils in a 2.5k sample. Even when the pollster tries to force a choice the vast majority refuse to give one (Remain has a slight edge in the tiny sample that do agree to a forced choice).
Maybe Dan Hodges will be right again – they will break overwhelmingly for the status quo.
!!! The phony war? What do you want in payment of this "debt"? Archangel?
The period after the fall of France was hardly phony...
True the Battle of Britain wasn't phony, but I can't see why Russia owes Britain a debt for that.
Without us there would have been no two-front war in Europe and the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis.
The USSR would have kicked Germany's arse with or without us. It's one of my specialist subjects . The only scenario in which I imagine Germany winning would be if it had launched Barbarossa in early May '41. It was Yugoslavia and the Balkans that screwed Hitler. Had he taken Moscow and Leningrad in '41, he might have forced a capitulation.
How well could Russia have fought without the Western weapons? Serious question, I don't know how critical US and UK supplies were in those critical months of Leningrad and Stalingrad.
The US provided gigantic quantities of logistic capability to allow the USSR to focus on armaments. Fully 50% of their aviation fuel was supplied by the US, the majority of Train rolling stock and trucks were US.
What is very clear is that pollsters cannot in current climate embargo polls as TNS sought to do
Why do they even try, it it a legacy from when the poll would be published by a newspaper with 1,000 words of editorial around it? Surely send the embargoed poll to only a couple of people that really need to see it, then send the press release out to everyone at the publication time.
I'm coming to Pulpstar's point of view on embargoed polling.
Treat them like insider trading.
In the past the pollster has chosen to end the embargo at the optimal point for them to get the best coverage.
Indeed. Anyone who was watching Betfair knew there was something going half an hour before the poll appeared. Betting on the content of an embargoed poll is exactly like insider trading, in that it gives an unfair edge based on privileged information.
!!! The phony war? What do you want in payment of this "debt"? Archangel?
The period after the fall of France was hardly phony...
True the Battle of Britain wasn't phony, but I can't see why Russia owes Britain a debt for that.
Without us there would have been no two-front war in Europe and the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis.
The USSR would have kicked Germany's arse with or without us. It's one of my specialist subjects . The only scenario in which I imagine Germany winning would be if it had launched Barbarossa in early May '41. It was Yugoslavia and the Balkans that screwed Hitler. Had he taken Moscow and Leningrad in '41, he might have forced a capitulation.
How well could Russia have fought without the Western weapons? Serious question, I don't know how critical US and UK supplies were in those critical months of Leningrad and Stalingrad.
Had Hitler secured the caucus oilfields, taken St Petersburg and cut the supply lines from Murmansk/Archangel to Moscow, I imagine it would have been far harder for the Soviet army to resist and counterattack. The key, then, would be German supply lines and ability to hold territory.
The impact of Lend-Lease was almost non-existent in 1941. Later it became very important. IIRC the West supplied about a third of the Soviet airforce. More importantly, we helped them with locomotives, rolling stock, rails and trucks. That materially shortened the war as it made the Soviets much more mobile in 43+ than they had been at the start of the conflict.
We can argue about what Germany's strategic objectives should have been, but even advancing to the historical lines they achieved in Oct '41 stretched the Heer to its limits. A simultaneous advance to the Caucasus would have been far beyond its capabilities.
Attractive article, written with Cyclefree's usual verve and fluency.
But the conclusions are in my view mistaken, and, more important, have no chance of acceptance on the Continent. British exceptionalism is seen as all right up to a point (World War II, ancient Parliament, freedom of speech) but vastly overrated in the modern era, where other democracies work more constructively, other economies work better and other political classes are, frankly, less up themselves than the British.
How exactly do the other economies "work better"?
Unemployment rate: UK 5.4% Eurozone 11.0%
Youth Unemployment Rate: UK 13.2% Eurozone 21.2%
Participation Ratio UK 78.3% Eurozone 56.8%
Nick believes that Germany = the EU. That's really the only economy in the EU which works better than ours overall, though they are helped hugely by an undervalued currency. The DM would be trading at parity with Sterling, if not slightly stronger.
I think Germany outperformed the UK when the DM was a lot stronger than the £. Economies tend to work well if they are well-manged both privately and publicly. Over-reliance on the exchange rate to sell your goods is very dangerous.
No they didn't, and when the advantage is structural it isn't very dangerous.
I think we must agree to differ - but I remember the 70-90s rather well.
I'm looking at the World Bank data and you're empirically wrong. Cumulative UK growth per capita since 1970 is 86.58%, for Germany it is 84.11% since 1970.
So you're saying that the German economy is now smaller than the UK economy or that at some point in that period we have begun slowly to catch up - I wonder how much of the is since we joined the EU
Are you thick? Over the same time period our per capita growth has been largely identical to Germany's per capita growth. Comparing absolute values is completely pointless because Germany has a 25% larger population.
No need to be rude. Only since the DDR was absorbed. The figures you quote do not show change over the period a point you choose to ignore. Incidentally also worth remembering that such growth has occurred during both the period of EU membership and relatively high levels of immigration - both of which Leave want to end. Funny that.
Again, it covers the whole period, and it uses per capita growth which eliminates the effect of immigration.
Not if you assume that without the high immigration the whole picture would be very different.
GDP (purchasing power parity) $2.387 trillion (2013 est.) $2.343 trillion (2012 est.) $2.341 trillion (2011 est.) note: data are in 2013 US dollars $3.227 trillion (2013 est.) $3.211 trillion (2012 est.) $3.182 trillion (2011 est.) note: data are in 2013 US dollars GDP - real growth rate 1.8% (2013 est.) 0.1% (2012 est.) 0.9% (2011 est.) 0.5% (2013 est.) 0.9% (2012 est.) 3.4% (2011 est.) GDP - per capita (PPP) $37,300 (2013 est.) $37,100 (2012 est.) $37,300 (2011 est.) note: data are in 2013 US dollars $39,500 (2013 est.) $39,200 (2012 est.) $38,900 (2011 est.) note: data are in 2013 US dollars
!!! The phony war? What do you want in payment of this "debt"? Archangel?
The period after the fall of France was hardly phony...
True the Battle of Britain wasn't phony, but I can't see why Russia owes Britain a debt for that.
Without us there would have been no two-front war in Europe and the USSR would have fallen to the Nazis.
Oh, gosh. That is a very big statement Mr. Glenn. The strategic initiative on the Eastern Front shifted irrevocably to the Soviets at Kursk in July 1943, nearly a full year before the second front opened. Even if you take in the Western Allies bombing offensive (which really didn't get into top gear until well after Kursk), I think there is very little evidence that supports the contention it was a two front war that stopped USSR falling to the Nazis.
I think he's right. Because the UK wasn't knocked out the Wehrmacht had to station at least a quarter of its strength in France and Norway, and divert substantial resources to a submarine and strategic air war. Later, our involvement and the Royal Navy made lend-lease convoys to the USSR feasible.
I think the USSR might have politically collapsed in 1941/1942 if we'd been neutral or defeated.
Mr. Royale, I fear I must disagree with you. The critical time in the East the time when there was a reasonable chance of a German win was 1941. The German assets deployed to the Western Front at that time was far less than a quarter of its strength. There was not at that time much to defend against.
Bad luck, bad generalship, and a failure to concentrate (why go after the bloody balkans FFS?) stopped Germany taking Moscow. Whether the fall of Moscow would have lead to the political collapse of the USSR and the end of the war in the East I do not know. I doubt it (see 1812),
Having failed to achieve a knockout in 1941 the Germans were on a loser because the USSR had manpower reserves that Germany just could not hope to match.
The number of don't knows in TNS seems awfully high.
Also, if true, it looks like the very young will fail to turn out decisively, yet again.
What the hell is wrong with young people if they won't turn out even for this? I voted eagerly at my first opportunity in 2005, and even if one doesn't like politicians this is important!
We view voting as a civic duty and of supreme importance.
For all the talk of Labour voters shifting to Leave, for me the real story from TNS is:
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
If they want their next referendum sooner, surely it should be more like 85% SNP for Leave
That makes no sense. Scotland has to vote Remain as big as possible while UK votes Leave. If both Scotland and the UK vote Leave then there is no case for a second IndyRef.
But will the German taxpayer countenance the fiscal transfers that full monetary union would have to entail to be stable? Don't see it happening myself - the Germans want their cake and to eat it.
On the other hand, unemployment is a record low in Germany, a direct consequence of there lower Euro that comes from being in the currency union. If they leave the Euro, their currency works appreciate 30%+, which could crush their export economy.
Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the Government has decided to talk up the risk of its own currency:
Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn No10 source: "Sterling volatility now at levels of financial crisis in 2008". Expect to hear a lot more Brexit armageddon in next 8 days.
If the Labour Party had any sense they'd tell him to take a long walk off a short plank. But sense doesn't seem to be in abundance within the Labour leadership right now.
Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the Government has decided to talk up the risk of its own currency:
Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn No10 source: "Sterling volatility now at levels of financial crisis in 2008". Expect to hear a lot more Brexit armageddon in next 8 days.
I noticed the BBC were pushing this line yesterday.
Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the Government has decided to talk up the risk of its own currency:
Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn No10 source: "Sterling volatility now at levels of financial crisis in 2008". Expect to hear a lot more Brexit armageddon in next 8 days.
For all the talk of Labour voters shifting to Leave, for me the real story from TNS is:
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
If they want their next referendum sooner, surely it should be more like 85% SNP for Leave
That makes no sense. Scotland has to vote Remain as big as possible while UK votes Leave. If both Scotland and the UK vote Leave then there is no case for a second IndyRef.
Is this a variant of the prisoner's dilemma? Assuming your hypothesis then SNP supporters need enough of them to vote Leave to get a UK overall Leave vote but without knowing how the other SNP voters will vote.
Unless we get a Remain lead in pretty short order, even accepting the polls are to be taken with large pinches of salt after last year, and there will be pencil hovering on the day etc we must be very close to the point where Juncker/Merkel say something (anything indeed) self denial or not.
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
Problem I see is with any "vow" even if it comes is the question of authority. At least one would assume the Scots could believe that those giving the Sindy vow would be those who would, in some combination, have the power to actually do it (as opposed to believing whether they would follow through on it or not). Is Merkel or Juncker saying anything going to mean much anyway as they do not have the power to 100% enact treaty change. It would of course utterly undermine Cameron because it would show up that his deal was in fact rubbish (most of us on here did point that out at the time), and would prove Europe will only talk if they know the ammunition is live in the chamber, which isn't really an edifying set of rules for a club.
Oddly I still expect Remain to squeak this but it would be Pyrrhic if they do.
Anecdote, I have a retail shop in the Ellesmere Port area on the Wirral. The window cleaner who has been a long standing resident for decades has just told me he does not know anyone voting remain, everyone is voting out. WWC Labour heartland
:O :O Didn't think PB would have anyone else from the Port.
I think there is a famous farm shop come Vinters with PB connections.
Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the Government has decided to talk up the risk of its own currency:
Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn No10 source: "Sterling volatility now at levels of financial crisis in 2008". Expect to hear a lot more Brexit armageddon in next 8 days.
To be fair, CR, it's also true.
Not from the data i'm seeing.
Besides which the Government should be acting responsibly now, continuing to campaign, but planning for all eventualities.
Just off down the pub after an interminable day of filling in forms; for relaxation I'm building a model of the 2015 voters to apply such poll breakdowns to various constituencies.
This isn't going to be hugely useful given votes are not announced next week on constituency lines, but it will cheer me up anyway!
Unless we get a Remain lead in pretty short order, even accepting the polls are to be taken with large pinches of salt after last year, and there will be pencil hovering on the day etc we must be very close to the point where Juncker/Merkel say something (anything indeed) self denial or not.
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
Problem I see is with any "vow" even if it comes is the question of authority. At least one would assume the Scots could believe that those giving the Sindy vow would be those who would, in some combination, have the power to actually do it (as opposed to believing whether they would follow through on it or not). Is Merkel or Juncker saying anything going to mean much anyway as they do not have the power to 100% enact treaty change. It would of course utterly undermine Cameron because it would show up that his deal was in fact rubbish (most of us on here did point that out at the time), and would prove Europe will only talk if they know the ammunition is live in the chamber, which isn't really an edifying set of rules for a club.
Oddly I still expect Remain to squeak this but it would be Pyrrhic if they do.
Oddly, I am now feeling a Remain win again (the past 10 days I have been thinking it will be Leave and bet accordingly last week well before the disastrous 10-pointer came out on Friday). So my position is still Leave, which I have at very good odds.
The huge volume of DKs around mean that Leave has it's work cut out to bring home those votes on the day – history shows us that they tend to break overwhelmingly for the status quo.
Free movement is one of the founding principles of the EU. How could you suddenly re-design it a week before a referendum? Even if they did and even if we stayed in, what sort of precedent would it set? How long before a Dutch referendum showing a majority of Dutch people supporting Dutchit and another vow being made over whatever concession was really needed.
If the Labour Party had any sense they'd tell him to take a long walk off a short plank. But sense doesn't seem to be in abundance within the Labour leadership right now.
Free movement is one of the founding principles of the EU. How could you suddenly re-design it a week before a referendum? Even if they did and even if we stayed in, what sort of precedent would it set? How long before a Dutch referendum showing a majority of Dutch people supporting Dutchit and another vow being made over whatever concession was really needed.
They can't and won't, as it blows the EU founding principles apart. And if they give special exemptions to the UK, every other country is going to come knocking for their own special conditions.
Unless we get a Remain lead in pretty short order, even accepting the polls are to be taken with large pinches of salt after last year, and there will be pencil hovering on the day etc we must be very close to the point where Juncker/Merkel say something (anything indeed) self denial or not.
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
Problem I see is with any "vow" even if it comes is the question of authority. At least one would assume the Scots could believe that those giving the Sindy vow would be those who would, in some combination, have the power to actually do it (as opposed to believing whether they would follow through on it or not). Is Merkel or Juncker saying anything going to mean much anyway as they do not have the power to 100% enact treaty change. It would of course utterly undermine Cameron because it would show up that his deal was in fact rubbish (most of us on here did point that out at the time), and would prove Europe will only talk if they know the ammunition is live in the chamber, which isn't really an edifying set of rules for a club.
Oddly I still expect Remain to squeak this but it would be Pyrrhic if they do.
Oddly, I am now feeling a Remain win again (the past 10 days I have been thinking it will be Leave and bet accordingly last week well before the disastrous 10-pointer came out on Friday). So my position is still Leave, which I have at very good odds.
The huge volume of DKs around mean that Leave has it's work cut out to bring home those votes on the day – history shows us that they tend to break overwhelmingly for the status quo.
Weird. But I am now thinking Remain again.
The fish has been hooked, it's on the edge of the net, but it could yet wriggle and not be landed on the bank.
Or put another way the corpulent woman is not singing, not even warming up the tonsils, but I'd say she's fiddling in her handbag looking for the throat spray.
'But the conclusions are in my view mistaken, and, more important, have no chance of acceptance on the Continent. British exceptionalism is seen as all right up to a point (World War II, ancient Parliament, freedom of speech) but vastly overrated in the modern era, where other democracies work more constructively, other economies work better and other political classes are, frankly, less up themselves than the British.'
Unless we get a Remain lead in pretty short order, even accepting the polls are to be taken with large pinches of salt after last year, and there will be pencil hovering on the day etc we must be very close to the point where Juncker/Merkel say something (anything indeed) self denial or not.
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
Problem I see is with any "vow" even if it comes is the question of authority. At least one would assume the Scots could believe that those giving the Sindy vow would be those who would, in some combination, have the power to actually do it (as opposed to believing whether they would follow through on it or not). Is Merkel or Juncker saying anything going to mean much anyway as they do not have the power to 100% enact treaty change. It would of course utterly undermine Cameron because it would show up that his deal was in fact rubbish (most of us on here did point that out at the time), and would prove Europe will only talk if they know the ammunition is live in the chamber, which isn't really an edifying set of rules for a club.
Oddly I still expect Remain to squeak this but it would be Pyrrhic if they do.
Juncker will be coming to the UK next week. This is a clear sign that Remain are panicking.
Unless we get a Remain lead in pretty short order, even accepting the polls are to be taken with large pinches of salt after last year, and there will be pencil hovering on the day etc we must be very close to the point where Juncker/Merkel say something (anything indeed) self denial or not.
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
Problem I see is with any "vow" even if it comes is the question of authority. At least one would assume the Scots could believe that those giving the Sindy vow would be those who would, in some combination, have the power to actually do it (as opposed to believing whether they would follow through on it or not). Is Merkel or Juncker saying anything going to mean much anyway as they do not have the power to 100% enact treaty change. It would of course utterly undermine Cameron because it would show up that his deal was in fact rubbish (most of us on here did point that out at the time), and would prove Europe will only talk if they know the ammunition is live in the chamber, which isn't really an edifying set of rules for a club.
Oddly I still expect Remain to squeak this but it would be Pyrrhic if they do.
Oddly, I am now feeling a Remain win again (the past 10 days I have been thinking it will be Leave and bet accordingly last week well before the disastrous 10-pointer came out on Friday). So my position is still Leave, which I have at very good odds.
The huge volume of DKs around mean that Leave has it's work cut out to bring home those votes on the day – history shows us that they tend to break overwhelmingly for the status quo.
Weird. But I am now thinking Remain again.
The fish has been hooked, it's on the edge of the net, but it could yet wriggle and not be landed on the bank.
Or put another way the corpulent woman is not singing, not even warming up the tonsils, but I'd say she's fiddling in her handbag looking for the throat spray.
Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the Government has decided to talk up the risk of its own currency:
Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn No10 source: "Sterling volatility now at levels of financial crisis in 2008". Expect to hear a lot more Brexit armageddon in next 8 days.
To be fair, CR, it's also true.
It's despicable. It seems every opportunity they get Remain demonstrate their utter contempt for the people they're trying to convince.
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
How about this for a game-changer: Cameron could announce his immediate resignation, admit that he messed up the renegotiation and urge people to vote Remain to give the new leader a chance to go to Brussels and do it properly this time?
Pretty daft to take anything out of SNP sample of 68 voters in TNS given that all full Scottish polls including TNS have shown the SNP support breaking 2-1 for Remain. Also I wouldn't be surprised if there is a cock up here in the sub tables - TNS show a lead of 10 for Remain in Scotland. SNP are half the sample. That would mean Remain having a 26 point lead among Labour and Tory Lib and UKIP combined for it to square the two sub samples. Seems very unlikely and so moral is PUT NOT YOUR FAITH IN SMALL SUB SAMPLES.
BBC covering Tom Watson saying EU migration rules need to change is good for leave, just reminds people about immigration and they know which side will deal best with that.
Sounds more like maouvreing for the top Labour job, than a serious proposal.
Cooper, Balls and Hunt have all made similar statements today/yesterday. It's obviously orchestrated for the long term. But risky in the short term but you have to ask why they're campaigning for remain if they want to control EU immigration?
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
How about this for a game-changer: Cameron could announce his immediate resignation, admit that he messed up the renegotiation and urge people to vote Remain to give the new leader a chance to go to Brussels and do it properly this time?
Must admit I've been wondering this too.
His support base must be at the lowest ever ebb presently.
Free movement is one of the founding principles of the EU. How could you suddenly re-design it a week before a referendum? Even if they did and even if we stayed in, what sort of precedent would it set? How long before a Dutch referendum showing a majority of Dutch people supporting Dutchit and another vow being made over whatever concession was really needed.
He's hoping kicking the can down the road to 2020, for a future Labour GE2020 manifesto, brings enough Labour voters back on board for Remain such that they win now.
For all the talk of Labour voters shifting to Leave, for me the real story from TNS is:
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
If they want their next referendum sooner, surely it should be more like 85% SNP for Leave
That makes no sense. Scotland has to vote Remain as big as possible while UK votes Leave. If both Scotland and the UK vote Leave then there is no case for a second IndyRef.
Is this a variant of the prisoner's dilemma? Assuming your hypothesis then SNP supporters need enough of them to vote Leave to get a UK overall Leave vote but without knowing how the other SNP voters will vote.
Frankly, I think it shows a lack of tactical voting period.
If Alistair is right about the type of Euroref result that will justify Sindyref2, then he needs to think it through.
If Alistair is right, Unionist should be voting Remain en masse to deny SNP its Sindyref2 outcome. Ergo, the only way for that outcome to happen is for the bulk, but not all, of SNP to vote Leave.
Attractive article, written with Cyclefree's usual verve and fluency.
But the conclusions are in my view mistaken, and, more important, have no chance of acceptance on the Continent. British exceptionalism is seen as all right up to a point (World War II, ancient Parliament, freedom of speech) but vastly overrated in the modern era, where other democracies work more constructively, other economies work better and other political classes are, frankly, less up themselves than the British.
There are 28 members, one of which is contemplating walking out against the advice of the majority of its own elected leaders of nearly all persuasions. It's going to be seen as a Trump-like populist revolt, to be treated with the same mixture of revulsion and resigned tolerance that we will treat a possible President Trump.
That's not a reason to accept their view - sure, they might all be wrong. But it's important that we don't kid ourselves into thinking that we can walk out, turn round and get an understanding reception. It'll be difficult and unpleasant and severe damage will result. If we think that it's nonetheless worth it, so we can be "free" of European consensus, so be it. But it's important not to hope to wreck a marriage and then be good friends. It doesn't usually happen..
Freedom of speech - overrated - hmmm Are you sure you have moved on from your communist days?
Comments
I think the USSR might have politically collapsed in 1941/1942 if we'd been neutral or defeated.
TNS online gives LEAVE 7% lead
OGH has spoken....
For DKs - the push question:
20% remain
17% leave
55+: 98% registered
18-24: 86% registered
2015 SNP voters: breaking 56% Leave, 38% Remain.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanshin-ron
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hokushin-ron
When watching TV coverage place it horizontally on the screen. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are below the line, this means Leave is winning. If the corners of a BBC presenter's mouth are above the line, it means Remain is winning
Edited extra bit: needed*
I find a lot of what Cameron has done and how makes a great deal of sense from his perspective, even if it has not in the least worked out it seems or other options were better.
Boris just became PM.
Mr. Urquhart, the champagne cork quotient (CCQ) is another valid metric.
Also, if true, it looks like the very young will fail to turn out decisively, yet again.
"It should be noted that among the entire general public the picture is more balanced with 33% supporting Remain, 35% supporting Leave and 32% undecided or planning not to vote."
All to play for?
Many a true word ......
So, it needs Merkel, Tusk, Junker and a 5-tonne slab of Carrara Marble.
2015 Tory voters: 53% Leave, 37% Remain
2015 Labour voters: 62% Remain, 30% Leave
2015 UKIP voters: 91% Leave, 6% Remain
2015 Lib Dem voters: 52% Remain, 43% Leave
2015 SNP voters: 56% Leave, 38% Remain
What is very clear is that pollsters cannot in current climate embargo polls as TNS sought to do
Mainly because punters thought that something had to happen to stop him, and couldn't get their head around that he would win.
A similar thing might be happening here. all the 'evidence' is pointing one way, but the odds don't reflect it yet, becuase people can't beleive that it will actually happen.
Had Hitler secured the caucus oilfields, taken St Petersburg and cut the supply lines from Murmansk/Archangel to Moscow, I imagine it would have been far harder for the Soviet army to resist and counterattack. The key, then, would be German supply lines and ability to hold territory.
Treat them like insider trading.
In the past the pollster has chosen to end the embargo at the optimal point for them to get the best coverage.
Maybe Dan Hodges will be right again – they will break overwhelmingly for the status quo.
Food for thought.
Remain 33
Leave 35
DK/WNV 32
We can argue about what Germany's strategic objectives should have been, but even advancing to the historical lines they achieved in Oct '41 stretched the Heer to its limits. A simultaneous advance to the Caucasus would have been far beyond its capabilities.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/13/ken-livingstone-to-demand-his-labour-membership-be-reinstated-du/
Figures can tell all sorts of stories;
http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/united-kingdom./Germany. UK sets followed by Germany
GDP (purchasing power parity)
$2.387 trillion (2013 est.)
$2.343 trillion (2012 est.)
$2.341 trillion (2011 est.)
note: data are in 2013 US dollars
$3.227 trillion (2013 est.)
$3.211 trillion (2012 est.)
$3.182 trillion (2011 est.)
note: data are in 2013 US dollars
GDP - real growth rate
1.8% (2013 est.)
0.1% (2012 est.)
0.9% (2011 est.)
0.5% (2013 est.)
0.9% (2012 est.)
3.4% (2011 est.)
GDP - per capita (PPP)
$37,300 (2013 est.)
$37,100 (2012 est.)
$37,300 (2011 est.)
note: data are in 2013 US dollars
$39,500 (2013 est.)
$39,200 (2012 est.)
$38,900 (2011 est.)
note: data are in 2013 US dollars
Neither can we assume they are representative of the votes that will be cast on the day.
Bad luck, bad generalship, and a failure to concentrate (why go after the bloody balkans FFS?) stopped Germany taking Moscow. Whether the fall of Moscow would have lead to the political collapse of the USSR and the end of the war in the East I do not know. I doubt it (see 1812),
Having failed to achieve a knockout in 1941 the Germans were on a loser because the USSR had manpower reserves that Germany just could not hope to match.
Not everyone else cares.
BNP voters
Remain 78%
Leave 22%
Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
No10 source: "Sterling volatility now at levels of financial crisis in 2008". Expect to hear a lot more Brexit armageddon in next 8 days.
A month ago: vote the wrong way and we're doomed! Doomed I tell you!
Now: Confidence has been shaken! This is clearly Leave's fault!
Their proclamations of woe and doom would have more credibility if Cameron hadn't previously said we'd be fine outside the EU.
https://twitter.com/sunny_hundal/status/742730543016611840
It's as plain as a pikestaff that freedom of movement is the issue and that everyone around the negotiating table a few months ago made a huge error in not believing the Brits would be anywhere near this position at this point. Cameron, Merkel, Juncker, Tusk, the lot of them.
Problem I see is with any "vow" even if it comes is the question of authority. At least one would assume the Scots could believe that those giving the Sindy vow would be those who would, in some combination, have the power to actually do it (as opposed to believing whether they would follow through on it or not). Is Merkel or Juncker saying anything going to mean much anyway as they do not have the power to 100% enact treaty change. It would of course utterly undermine Cameron because it would show up that his deal was in fact rubbish (most of us on here did point that out at the time), and would prove Europe will only talk if they know the ammunition is live in the chamber, which isn't really an edifying set of rules for a club.
Oddly I still expect Remain to squeak this but it would be Pyrrhic if they do.
Besides which the Government should be acting responsibly now, continuing to campaign, but planning for all eventualities.
This isn't going to be hugely useful given votes are not announced next week on constituency lines, but it will cheer me up anyway!
The huge volume of DKs around mean that Leave has it's work cut out to bring home those votes on the day – history shows us that they tend to break overwhelmingly for the status quo.
Weird. But I am now thinking Remain again.
Planks, however, are everywhere.
Or put another way the corpulent woman is not singing, not even warming up the tonsils, but I'd say she's fiddling in her handbag looking for the throat spray.
Vapid Bilge winner of the day.
Ms Reeves accused Lord Jones of 'loving to interrupt women' as a debate over the EU referendum turned nasty.
But he shot back that she was 'off on your prejudice'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3641054/You-just-love-interrupting-women-Labour-MP-Rachel-Reeves-ex-CBI-chief-furious-TV-bust-EU-referendum.html
Is it me or is Digby Jones looking more and more Roy Chubby Brown?
His support base must be at the lowest ever ebb presently.
If Alistair is right about the type of Euroref result that will justify Sindyref2, then he needs to think it through.
If Alistair is right, Unionist should be voting Remain en masse to deny SNP its Sindyref2 outcome. Ergo, the only way for that outcome to happen is for the bulk, but not all, of SNP to vote Leave.