The BBC would do itself a favour by not retweeting The Daily Hate without the sort of health warning that appears on cigarette packets. It should read "Warning this newspaper can bring about a recession".
There is no secret EU report on Scotland. What there is now is a number of influential figures already breaking cover to confirm meetings with Sturgeon.
Like the ex PM of Belgium?
I recall someones comment on that about a time machine
Unbelievable to see posters like Barnesian saying sod the will of the public, as I don't agree with the result of the referendum Parliament should ignore it. The arrogance is breathtaking.
Europhile arrogance is one of the major reasons they lost the referendum.
It's not. The major reason was immigration. That said I agree it's time to give Brexiteers a fair crack of the whip and see what they can negotiate. Surely that's in all our interests. If it doesn't work we're all screwed financially.
This came from Tim Farron to me by mass email tonight:
"I believe our country’s future is still best served by our membership of the European Union, despite its flaws. Millions of our fellow citizens believe that. I also believe many of those people share our vision of a country that is tolerant, compassionate and positive about Britain’s role for good in the world. They share our vision of a country that wants to repair its divisions by working hard together, not by offering cheap slogans.
That is why I want to make clear that the Liberal Democrats will fight the next election on a clear and unequivocal promise to restore Britain’s prosperity and role in the world, with the United Kingdom in the European Union, not outside it."
What is it with the Remainer obsession that article 50 be invoked immediately?
Why are leavers so scared of, you know, actually Leaving?
To force you to write question marks and tweets on betting sites.
Leavers now hold the gun and the EU hostage with it, so keep wondering about our demands and keep posting question marks and tweets, your quota is 5000 for tomorrow or the EU gets it.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
Unbelievable to see posters like Barnesian saying sod the will of the public, as I don't agree with the result of the referendum Parliament should ignore it. The arrogance is breathtaking.
Europhile arrogance is one of the major reasons they lost the referendum.
It's not. The major reason was immigration. That said I agree it's time to give Brexiteers a fair crack of the whip and see what they can negotiate. Surely that's in all our interests. If it doesn't work we're all screwed financially.
Until the political parties, especially the left, realise the major reason wasn't immigration, we might actually get some progress.
That is why I want to make clear that the Liberal Democrats will fight the next election on a clear and unequivocal promise to restore Britain’s prosperity and role in the world, with the United Kingdom in the European Union, not outside it."
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
To be fair, Boris won his independence referendum...
Boris has - whatever his flaws - an X Factor. He can bridge gaps no other Tory can. He's a positive force, people who've no idea what Latin or wiff-waff are go all fuzzy around him.
I've no idea quite how he does it. But it works. He's unthreatening, very clever in an oddly unsmartpants way and makes people smile. He's totally imperfect - and that doesn't harm him either.
He doesn't get anxious when others throw crap at him, and smiles along when his dad disagrees. It's almost always water off a rueful duck's back.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
I can't see why the Tory party will necessarily have a massive problem.
Most Eurosceptics in the Tory party were driven by high-minded sovereignty issues rather than the baser stuff around foreigners.
When the party regroups around a new leader there's no need for it to pander to the Farage school of thought. The Tories have what they want in bringing powers back from Brussels, if there is a big band of support out there for even less (or zero) immigration then those supporters can support UKIP. There is no need for the Tories to feel obligated to the Kipper vote.
Immigration doesn't bother me. But the idea of uncontrolled immigration did. Not because it was immigration, it couldve been uncontrolled nudity. It was the point of principle that our government - the people we hire and fire - had no say in it.
Politics is damaged enough without politicians being in a position to make more excuses. I want our politicans fully accountable for things that happen here, and let's face it, immigration is clearly a big issue. The Brexit vote was a step towards that.
The only problem with this is that there are quite a few Tory constituencies that had massive Brexit votes and would be vulnerable to UKIP
Boston - 76% leave South Holland -74% Castle Point - 73% Thurrock - 72% Great Yarmouth - 72% Fenland (NE Cambs) - 71% NE Lincs (Cleethorpes) -70% Havering (Hornchurch) - 70% Cannock - 69% Basildon - 69% Harlow - 68% Tamworth - 68% Blackpool - 68% N Warwickshire - 67% Rochford - 67% Kings Lynn (NW Norfolk) - 66% Broxbourne - 66% Nuneaton - 66% Gravesham - 65% Forest Heath (W Suffolk) - 65%
It'd be fascinating to see the marginalish seats where MPs said they were Eurosceptic and then came out for Remain.
My MP Caroline Ansell came out for Brexit very late - Eastbourne went 57% Leave. She didn't campaign for selection on her EU position IIRC.
I was quite surprised at how well (relatively) Remain did in Eastbourne. Why do you think that was? Proximity to Brighton or traditional Lib Dem strength? ( Sorry for being a nerd).
Eastbourne has a large LD vote and a large migrant population. I expect both had an impact.
Remember that the average Leave vs Remain % in the SE was 52 vs 48. Eastbourne was clearly more Leave by a significant factor.
! They overestimate the youth vote by a factor of almost two. No wonder they were so out.
We do have to be careful with the denominator in turnout calculations. Many under 24s will be registered twice.
I'm assuming this figure came from polling? In which case the question of double registration doesn't apply. Still the figures seem a bit low for me, even given the relative lack of engagement of youth. If they were claiming before the vote that they were going to vote, then lack of engagement isn't really an issue.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
To be fair, Boris won his independence referendum...
Boris has - whatever his flaws - an X Factor. He can bridge gaps no other Tory can. He's a positive force, people who've no idea what Latin or wiff-waff are go all fuzzy around him.
I've no idea quite how he does it. But it works. He's unthreatening, very clever in an oddly unsmartpants way and makes people smile. He's totally imperfect - and that doesn't harm him either.
He doesn't get anxious when others throw crap at him, and smiles along when his dad disagrees. It's almost always water off a rueful duck's back.
But he's spoilt goods now...
Even in London, he's now hated.
There will be a shitstorm heading his way about his past indiscretions.
To be fair, Boris won his independence referendum...
Boris has - whatever his flaws - an X Factor. He can bridge gaps no other Tory can. He's a positive force, people who've no idea what Latin or wiff-waff are go all fuzzy around him.
I've no idea quite how he does it. But it works. He's unthreatening, very clever in an oddly unsmartpants way and makes people smile. He's totally imperfect - and that doesn't harm him either.
He doesn't get anxious when others throw crap at him, and smiles along when his dad disagrees. It's almost always water off a rueful duck's back.
But he's spoilt goods now...
Even in London, he's now hated.
I thought you progressives abhored people who hate other people for their views?
@BBCKimGhattas: The Sun, which was pro-Brexit, only now explains to its readers how their wallets will be hit by leaving the EU. https://t.co/TQ8stsqvwj
That's actually pretty gloomy reading from The Sun - the adverse effects of the falling pound and interest-rate hikes are its main concern. The next chancellor will have to be a Leaver for the simple reason that if a Remainer did it he'd be accused of acting out of pique because he lost. Crazy I know but that's where we've got to. I can't see a Remainer occupying a prominent role in British life ever again - too many would hate them and dismiss the integrity of their motives.
Looking at a property this afternoon in West Yorks. I said I was concerned about interest rates going up and estate agent gleefully told me that things are going to be okay now. I pointed out the fall in sterling and got a deafening silence. She offered up the comment 'I bet you can tell how I voted'. Frosty conversation ensued where she refused to accept that I had legitimate concerns. Viewing ended by her denigrating southerners. I have various options, no way an old bigot is going to benefit from my money.
Felt better for the first time in a couple of days...
If you can't handle a rise in interest rates - which is certainly going to happen at some point - then you shouldn't be buying a house.
Not an issue for me, mortgage nearly paid in full. Concerned that younger housebuyers would be put off buying completely, would prefer to sell to a buyer rather than a buy to letter or some such.
Amazing how many people seem to think that the movements in the markets the day after the vote offer any real insight into the real economic consequences of the decision. And this applies to Remainers citing the slump in the £ as evidence that all the bad predictions have come true, or Leavers saying "crisis over, that wasn't so bad after all".
I only asked her a fluffy question about her opinion on interest rates and ahe went off on a rant. I think the next few years will see little change in property (see below) myself. It's the end of this decade where things might start changing I feel.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Unbelievable to see posters like Barnesian saying sod the will of the public, as I don't agree with the result of the referendum Parliament should ignore it. The arrogance is breathtaking.
Parliament should act in the interests of the public. The public believe that Brexit will lead to scads of money and less immigration. Personally, I believe Article 50 should have been invoked if the referendum were indeed the democratic say of the people, but given LEAVE's unwillingness to actually begin to leave the EU, the mandate of the referendum becomes one of spirit and may be superceded by changes in public opinion, events or an election which returns a parliament not minded to enforce an advisory plebiscite, probably due to one of the first two reasons.
Given the leaves unwillingness to leave the EU......?
Oh give over FFS
You do realise
1) the vote result was within the last 48 hours and they are still putting the ballot goes back into storage. 2) it's a weekend 3) there are serious Euro 16 games to be played ... Might be the last of course but all the same
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
I still haven't heard someone put a serious argument as to why the EU would be giving a particular priority to keeping Scotland in, except if it helped in their future relationship with the rUK.
Since the vote, and it has been seen here too, there has just been an unending litany of defeated progressives basically stamping their feet like a two year old and shouting "Its not fair"
Its pathetic. Do you really think you will regain the confidence of the majority of the British People who voted against your sacred cow by behaving in this way.
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
I really cannot imagine 1. that EU member states would be happy to encourage secessionists. 2. That the EU institutions want to create more work for themselves right now. There's a lot going on already.
Am I missing something massively obvious, apart from it is almost certainly going to be Boris, but there are so wildly high odds on BF at moment for existing Cabinet ministers for leader.
Just had a couple of quid on Amber Rudd at 520 and Hunt at 520. If they start collecting signatures on Monday then these odds will tumble surely?
Whereas I have declined Nicky Morgan at only 130 (pls, someone tell her she's not up to it before she makes a fool of herself).
Unbelievable to see posters like Barnesian saying sod the will of the public, as I don't agree with the result of the referendum Parliament should ignore it. The arrogance is breathtaking.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Depending on how much they want to stick it to the UK, they might do just that.
If so it sets up a precedent they'd rather not as encouragement for various other states considering a referendum on the EU.
This came from Tim Farron to me by mass email tonight:
"I believe our country’s future is still best served by our membership of the European Union, despite its flaws. Millions of our fellow citizens believe that. I also believe many of those people share our vision of a country that is tolerant, compassionate and positive about Britain’s role for good in the world. They share our vision of a country that wants to repair its divisions by working hard together, not by offering cheap slogans.
That is why I want to make clear that the Liberal Democrats will fight the next election on a clear and unequivocal promise to restore Britain’s prosperity and role in the world, with the United Kingdom in the European Union, not outside it."
Oh God, that's another party I can't vote for then. Shame as I have often voted Liberal in the past! But attempting to reopen old wounds when the people have spoken, just doesn't seem very democratic to me. Particularly if (as Ashcroft reckons) about 1 in 3 LibDem voters voted Leave! Might bag him a few votes in some areas, I suppose, but for me it renders him completely beyond the pale.
To be fair, Boris won his independence referendum...
Boris has - whatever his flaws - an X Factor. He can bridge gaps no other Tory can. He's a positive force, people who've no idea what Latin or wiff-waff are go all fuzzy around him.
I've no idea quite how he does it. But it works. He's unthreatening, very clever in an oddly unsmartpants way and makes people smile. He's totally imperfect - and that doesn't harm him either.
He doesn't get anxious when others throw crap at him, and smiles along when his dad disagrees. It's almost always water off a rueful duck's back.
But he's spoilt goods now...
Even in London, he's now hated.
There will be a shitstorm heading his way about his past indiscretions.
Unbelievable to see posters like Barnesian saying sod the will of the public, as I don't agree with the result of the referendum Parliament should ignore it. The arrogance is breathtaking.
Parliament should act in the interests of the public. The public believe that Brexit will lead to scads of money and less immigration. Personally, I believe Article 50 should have been invoked if the referendum were indeed the democratic say of the people, but given LEAVE's unwillingness to actually begin to leave the EU, the mandate of the referendum becomes one of spirit and may be superceded by changes in public opinion, events or an election which returns a parliament not minded to enforce an advisory plebiscite, probably due to one of the first two reasons.
Given the leaves unwillingness to leave the EU......?
Oh give over FFS
You do realise
1) the vote result was within the last 48 hours and they are still putting the ballot goes back into storage. 2) it's a weekend 3) there are serious Euro 16 games to be played ... Might be the last of course but all the same
None of the LEAVE campaign have called for the Prime Minister to begin negotiations. They are all obsessed with their chances in the Tory leadership contest. Then three to four months pass and the new prime minister must deal with all the issues the apparently shadow administration of Cameron cannot, or even perhaps get through a general election. It seems a signal example of Westminster bubble behaviour that will come back to bite, but who am I to judge?
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
It's not AV - it's actually Exhaustive Ballot. You only get to cast one vote per round!
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
I still haven't heard someone put a serious argument as to why the EU would be giving a particular priority to keeping Scotland in, except if it helped in their future relationship with the rUK.
By your own admission you appear to have heard at least one.
I can't see why the Tory party will necessarily have a massive problem.
Most Eurosceptics in the Tory party were driven by high-minded sovereignty issues rather than the baser stuff around foreigners.
When the party regroups around a new leader there's no need for it to pander to the Farage school of thought. The Tories have what they want in bringing powers back from Brussels, if there is a big band of support out there for even less (or zero) immigration then those supporters can support UKIP. There is no need for the Tories to feel obligated to the Kipper vote.
Immigration doesn't bother me. But the idea of uncontrolled immigration did. Not because it was immigration, it couldve been uncontrolled nudity. It was the point of principle that our government - the people we hire and fire - had no say in it.
Politics is damaged enough without politicians being in a position to make more excuses. I want our politicans fully accountable for things that happen here, and let's face it, immigration is clearly a big issue. The Brexit vote was a step towards that.
The only problem with this is that there are quite a few Tory constituencies that had massive Brexit votes and would be vulnerable to UKIP
Boston - 76% leave South Holland -74% Castle Point - 73% Thurrock - 72% Great Yarmouth - 72% Fenland (NE Cambs) - 71% NE Lincs (Cleethorpes) -70% Havering (Hornchurch) - 70% Cannock - 69% Basildon - 69% Harlow - 68% Tamworth - 68% Blackpool - 68% N Warwickshire - 67% Rochford - 67% Kings Lynn (NW Norfolk) - 66% Broxbourne - 66% Nuneaton - 66% Gravesham - 65% Forest Heath (W Suffolk) - 65%
It'd be fascinating to see the marginalish seats where MPs said they were Eurosceptic and then came out for Remain.
My MP Caroline Ansell came out for Brexit very late - Eastbourne went 57% Leave. She didn't campaign for selection on her EU position IIRC.
I was quite surprised at how well (relatively) Remain did in Eastbourne. Why do you think that was? Proximity to Brighton or traditional Lib Dem strength? ( Sorry for being a nerd).
Eastbourne has a large LD vote and a large migrant population. I expect both had an impact.
Remember that the average Leave vs Remain % in the SE was 52 vs 48. Eastbourne was clearly more Leave by a significant factor.
I was surprised by Eastbourne voting Leave so heavily. Maybe Caroline Ansell's late decision made a difference with some voters.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Continuing state.
Successor states do not automatically inherit treaty rights. And it would be up to the EU (not the UK or rUK) whether it was continuing or successor.
Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 1h1 hour ago In Tory leadership contests there's one lesson from history - front runner fails almost always fails. Davis, Portillo, Howard, Heseltine...
Fair point, but the trouble with lessons from history is that they have been failing in recent months. History told us Corbyn wouldn't have a prayer. History told us Trump wouldn't get past Iowa. History told us Project Fear would smash it for Remain.
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
You tease
Have the Tories changed the rule so that there MUST be a vote of the party, unlike in 2005?
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
It's not AV - it's actually Exhaustive Ballot. You only get to cast one vote per round!
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
The candidate with the lowest vote in each round is eliminated, until there are two candidates left, and the one that gets over 50% wins.
I just wanted to thank Mike and others for all the threads I've read here over the last few years.
I've never bet in my life - i doubt myself with the risks of addiction given my love for chocolate - but seeing the posts when the first whispers of the Newcastle and Sunderland counts emerged, I pointed the chat out to my Brother in Law who does. He put £200 on Brexit and made around £1500. Happy chap owes me a pint and (I believe) has made your site a donation.
I would suggest all those banging on about second referendum might be better asking why it is that so many millions of people in midland and northern towns charged to the ballot box unseen for donkeys years to vote Leave, despite most being Labour strongholds.
Piece of advice....rather than hitting refresh on your browser to sign the petition again...head over to Guardian and read / watch John Harris stuff from the past 2 years.
We will get through the Brexit transition, some good things, some bad things, but we have a big societal problem and none of the parties want to admit it or tackle it.
I don't know how prevalent the Not Voted Since 1983 was - but the turnout in many Northern Labour seats was very significant. And in much higher numbers than GEs.
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
It's not AV - it's actually Exhaustive Ballot. You only get to cast one vote per round!
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
The candidate with the lowest vote in each round is eliminated, until there are two candidates left, and the one that gets over 50% wins.
Tell me how that is not AV?
Because you don't have to choose your order of preference at the start, you can change dependent on circumstances and how others appear to be voting.
I just wanted to thank Mike and others for all the threads I've read here over the last few years.
I've never bet in my life - i doubt myself with the risks of addiction given my love for chocolate - but seeing the posts when the first whispers of the Newcastle and Sunderland counts emerged, I pointed the chat out to my Brother in Law who does. He put £200 on Brexit and made around £1500. Happy chap owes me a pint and (I believe) has made your site a donation.
Newcastle and Sunderland were to this year what Nuneaton and Swindon were to last in terms of totally mad betting odds in defiance of the facts. And long may it continue.
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
It's not AV - it's actually Exhaustive Ballot. You only get to cast one vote per round!
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
The candidate with the lowest vote in each round is eliminated, until there are two candidates left, and the one that gets over 50% wins.
Tell me how that is not AV?
Because you don't have to choose your order of preference at the start, you can change dependent on circumstances and how others appear to be voting.
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
It's not AV - it's actually Exhaustive Ballot. You only get to cast one vote per round!
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
The candidate with the lowest vote in each round is eliminated, until there are two candidates left, and the one that gets over 50% wins.
Tell me how that is not AV?
Because you don't have to choose your order of preference at the start, you can change dependent on circumstances and how others appear to be voting.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Not whilst England still exists as a Continuator state. It would be the same as the Pakistan/Bangladesh situation where Pakistan was considered the Continuator State and Bangladesh the Successor state which had to reapply for membership of things like the UN.
The creation of two successor states with no continuator state usually only happens when the two new states are of similar nature in size/population etc and no one claims the rights of the Continuator.
This came from Tim Farron to me by mass email tonight:
"I believe our country’s future is still best served by our membership of the European Union, despite its flaws. Millions of our fellow citizens believe that. I also believe many of those people share our vision of a country that is tolerant, compassionate and positive about Britain’s role for good in the world. They share our vision of a country that wants to repair its divisions by working hard together, not by offering cheap slogans.
That is why I want to make clear that the Liberal Democrats will fight the next election on a clear and unequivocal promise to restore Britain’s prosperity and role in the world, with the United Kingdom in the European Union, not outside it."
Oh God, that's another party I can't vote for then. Shame as I have often voted Liberal in the past! But attempting to reopen old wounds when the people have spoken, just doesn't seem very democratic to me. Particularly if (as Ashcroft reckons) about 1 in 3 LibDem voters voted Leave! Might bag him a few votes in some areas, I suppose, but for me it renders him completely beyond the pale.
It is essential that the Liberals carry on arguing for the EU. Apart from anything else it gives the electorate the chance to vote for that option (48% wanted to stay). Labour may come out all guns blazing in favour or they may decide that they have to listen to their working class base and stop arguing for it.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Continuing state.
Successor states do not automatically inherit treat rights. And it would be up to the EU (not the UK or rUK) whether it was continuing or successor.
So that would answer the Catalunya (sp?) issue then? They couldn't split from Spain as Spain would be the continung state? Apologies if already mentioned, too many comments to read all of them!
I just wanted to thank Mike and others for all the threads I've read here over the last few years.
I've never bet in my life - i doubt myself with the risks of addiction given my love for chocolate - but seeing the posts when the first whispers of the Newcastle and Sunderland counts emerged, I pointed the chat out to my Brother in Law who does. He put £200 on Brexit and made around £1500. Happy chap owes me a pint and (I believe) has made your site a donation.
I refused to make an online account till last year for much the same reason as you indicate. But it has not been hard to manage it. I occasionally place a bet while drunk but even then it's never been stupid money or unaffordable.
Overall, I'd say go for it. You can set limits if you are concerned about losing control but I've never bothered and never found it an issue.
The majority of young people registered to vote did not bother. Many more did not register. If older people registered to vote and then did so it only goes to show that they cared more about the result. That's fair enough.
As was pointed out in the last thread, that's the NF who have been peddling their particular viewpoint for years now. Trying to tie the whole Leave campaign and their 17 million voters to those views didn't work when Cameron tried it and certainly won't work now.
This is turning into a tedious argument everywhere I look, can we all agree with the following
Not everyone who voted Leave is a nasty racist but all the nasty racists are voted Leave.
Not really, no.
One only has to read Giles Coren, Alex Massie or Matthew Parris to realise there are some nasty bigots on either side.
There was a cringe-inducing piece on the BBC earlier "And now we go to Castle Point, an area with the highest % of white, English speaking voters in the UK - we're expecting a high Leave vote"
Well I had written a thread featuring AV* in the morning, but it turned into a right hatchet job on Boris, but I've had to pull it, as I was shocked by my own vituperativeness at Boris.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
It's not AV - it's actually Exhaustive Ballot. You only get to cast one vote per round!
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
The candidate with the lowest vote in each round is eliminated, until there are two candidates left, and the one that gets over 50% wins.
Tell me how that is not AV?
Because you don't have to choose your order of preference at the start, you can change dependent on circumstances and how others appear to be voting.
That's why I originally called it quasi-AV.
Nothing like AV - with AV you get to cast your preferences all at once. It's like trying to argue with a REMAINER!
There will be a shitstorm heading his way about his past indiscretions.
What could anybody throw at him that hasn't been said before?
Personally I wouldn't want him as PM, but he's surprisingly good at winning things when his critics claim he is unelectable.
Are we talking about Boris here? I'm afraid he is from the Clinton mould. Whatever he has done can be brushed off with pure charisma and a forgiving partner.
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Not whilst England still exists as a Continuator state. It would be the same as the Pakistan/Bangladesh situation where Pakistan was considered the Continuator State and Bangladesh the Successor state which had to reapply for membership of things like the UN.
The creation of two successor states with no continuator state usually only happens when the two new states are of similar nature in size/population etc and no one claims the rights of the Continuator.
Surely that is a decision within the gift of the EU though.
I'll be honest. I felt sorry for Remainers. I was surprised to win on Thursday morning. I posted what I hope were sympathetic posts here, on Friday. I've lost, and felt small.
But, really, having read the endless bile and venom from Scott P, EPG, Stark Dawning, Olly T, Tyson, Wiiliam Glenn, Matt, et al, I'll now say, I'm glad you lost. You deserved to lose.
Suck it up, bitches.
Seems to me that some Remainers would rather see the world collapse around us, if that meant they could enjoy the simple narcissistic satisfaction of being proved right.
It seems that to them, the worst possible outcome would be to see the country succeed and even maybe thrive in the future - because that might just mean that one day they might have to admit they were wrong.
It's quite interesting isn't it?
Oh it's undoubtedly true. One social media post I've seen 'I hope Europe PUNISHES us'. Ghastly. Unhealthy self-loathing younger generation.
Agreed, that's nauseating. On the other hand there are plenty
The squeeling from the Europhiles is most enjoyable. I imagine very few actually campaigned for the UK to remain in the EU. Instead they sit behind their keyboards posting endless Twitter links or signing meaningless petitions.
There a plenty of people who voted for Remain who are are simply very worried about the possible financial implications of Brexit. And quite a few repentant Leavers as well it appears. I doubt the Boris and Gove show will have calmed to many fears on Friday. Perhaps you should consider that rather than making snide comments about keyboard warriors.
Clicktivists need to be mocked. I wonder how many of those youngsters signing the petition for a second referendum failed to actually vote in the first?
Utter scorn is too good for them.
18-24yr 36% TO
Says it all really.
Even 25-34yrs was only 53% TO
You have to be in it to win it.
Many of us oldsters have signed the petition. It isn't over yet. The referendum was only advisory and the result was very close. We are a representative democracy. MPs need to step up and veto this. Boris might be relieved.
Pfft
What a desperate fellow you are. More eligible voters said Leave than in any election since universal suffrage.
And you cite a made up petition packed with MickeyMouse@VaticanCity.com as a valid comparison?
This is talking about the UK leaving and Scotland staying. It doesn't appear to talk about Scotland separating before Article 50 talks conclude
You don't know what deal Britain will strike with the EU, right now the British incentive would be to include as many goodies for scotland in any deal as possible and hope for the scots to approve it. If the SNP tries to rush things then the incentive reverses, Britain will try to make a deal that is as worse as possible for scotland.
It's a gamble basically, can the SNP trust all the other EU countries that they won't betray them to the British in exchange for favourable terms in the Brexit deal?
For instance Poland and Britain may strike a deal over the status of polish workers in exchange for freezing scotland out of the EU.
Britain doesn't need to freeze Scotland out of the EU.
1. Scotland isn't a state, so it doesn't qualify. 2. Several other EU member states have their own secessionist movements that they do not want to embolden.
This is some amazingly 2014 thinking.
Dazzle me. Is Scotland a state? Do other EU member states not have secessionist problems of their own?
Does the EU have too much free time on its hands and a desire to faff about with pointless meeting or, does it perhaps have serious, difficult problems to deal with already, without inventing new problems for itself?
The 'PB Brexiteers are strongest opponents of Scottish Indy' maxim holds true once again.
Scottish indy, and scottish application to join the EU are two different things. Scottish indy would be a pre-requisite for the scottish application to join the EU.
Unless the EU chooses to treat Scotland as a successor state to the UK.
Not whilst England still exists as a Continuator state. It would be the same as the Pakistan/Bangladesh situation where Pakistan was considered the Continuator State and Bangladesh the Successor state which had to reapply for membership of things like the UN.
The creation of two successor states with no continuator state usually only happens when the two new states are of similar nature in size/population etc and no one claims the rights of the Continuator.
Surely that is a decision within the gift of the EU though.
Do we think the UN will offer the permanent security council seat to Scotland?
The BBC would do itself a favour by not retweeting The Daily Hate without the sort of health warning that appears on cigarette packets. It should read "Warning this newspaper can bring about a recession".
There is no secret EU report on Scotland. What there is now is a number of influential figures already breaking cover to confirm meetings with Sturgeon.
And you'd do yourself a lot of good for not being juvenile about a very big selling tabloid.
Comments
I recall someones comment on that about a time machine
Will say anything to try and stay relevant.
Leavers now hold the gun and the EU hostage with it, so keep wondering about our demands and keep posting question marks and tweets, your quota is 5000 for tomorrow or the EU gets it.
18-24: -8
25-34:+4
35-44:+8
45-54:+3
55-64:+4
65+: +5
(I'm using https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3575/How-Britain-voted-in-2015.aspx for the 2015 figures)
If only Adam Werrity was a Tory MP......
Put it on BBC4 now bitches.
Even in London, he's now hated.
Remember that the average Leave vs Remain % in the SE was 52 vs 48. Eastbourne was clearly more Leave by a significant factor.
Worked well for Labour.
Oh give over FFS
You do realise
1) the vote result was within the last 48 hours and they are still putting the ballot goes back into storage.
2) it's a weekend
3) there are serious Euro 16 games to be played ... Might be the last of course but all the same
I was gagging to vote at my first GE at 19. One really can't bleat if you can't be bothered to turn up.
Its pathetic. Do you really think you will regain the confidence of the majority of the British People who voted against your sacred cow by behaving in this way.
Contained the line 'like the many mistresses of Boris, should you be laying him?'
*The quasi-AV voting system the Tories use to elect their leads.
That's not necessarily a good thing. In fact, it's not.
@TomLong78: Why Boris didn't want to win and why he has now definitely lost #eurefresult https://t.co/NLdVDhsIDK
Why Article 50 was not triggered
Just had a couple of quid on Amber Rudd at 520 and Hunt at 520. If they start collecting signatures on Monday then these odds will tumble surely?
Whereas I have declined Nicky Morgan at only 130 (pls, someone tell her she's not up to it before she makes a fool of herself).
ThreeQuidder raises a very interesting point though. How much would dual-registration bias the figures. Surely not too much?
If so it sets up a precedent they'd rather not as encouragement for various other states considering a referendum on the EU.
Personally I wouldn't want him as PM, but he's surprisingly good at winning things when his critics claim he is unelectable.
Repeat after me: E X H A U S T I V E . B A L L O T.
Successor states do not automatically inherit treaty rights. And it would be up to the EU (not the UK or rUK) whether it was continuing or successor.
I'm frankly sick to death of the media sucking up to yoof voters as if their opinions mattered more.
They don't. And if they can't be arsed - well they should shut up.
In Tory leadership contests there's one lesson from history - front runner fails almost always fails. Davis, Portillo, Howard, Heseltine...
Fair point, but the trouble with lessons from history is that they have been failing in recent months. History told us Corbyn wouldn't have a prayer. History told us Trump wouldn't get past Iowa. History told us Project Fear would smash it for Remain.
Have the Tories changed the rule so that there MUST be a vote of the party, unlike in 2005?
Tell me how that is not AV?
I've never bet in my life - i doubt myself with the risks of addiction given my love for chocolate - but seeing the posts when the first whispers of the Newcastle and Sunderland counts emerged, I pointed the chat out to my Brother in Law who does. He put £200 on Brexit and made around £1500. Happy chap owes me a pint and (I believe) has made your site a donation.
It's an extremely intolerant attitude.
https://twitter.com/LDvotersforIndy/status/746832302345494529
The creation of two successor states with no continuator state usually only happens when the two new states are of similar nature in size/population etc and no one claims the rights of the Continuator.
A doctor's mandate...
Overall, I'd say go for it. You can set limits if you are concerned about losing control but I've never bothered and never found it an issue.
Blair (97-02) > Blair 03-07 > Cameron 2010-2015 > Cameron 2015/2016>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> D Miliband
The UK is crying out for something different than these dreary 40 something men in shiny suits.