Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
Given that your approach will make the UK a poorer place and therefore directly impact the NHS and the benefits people receive I expect all your red lines will be ignored. Its called realpolitik.
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
Given that your approach will make the UK a poorer place and therefore directly impact the NHS and the benefits people receive I expect all your red lines will be ignored. Its called realpolitik.
Free trade would make the Uk a poorer place? Wow, whats all the fuss about then?
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
Given that your approach will make the UK a poorer place and therefore directly impact the NHS and the benefits people receive I expect all your red lines will be ignored. Its called realpolitik.
@Philip_Thompson That's fine Philip. Everyone gets to decide for themselves which way they are going to vote, why, what they mean by the vote, which question they think they are answering and what their primary aim is. I was questioning whether an economic liberal's interests could be further by the victory of the Leave Campaign. Clearly they could be furthered by Brexit depending on what Brexit turns out to be. I'm making a tactical voting critique. If you believe in economic liberalism does helping that particular Leave Campaign win further your aims. It's too early to tell but it seems far from obvious that the answer is Yes.
Farage, who will step down as leader of UKIP at the party’s yearly conference later this week, is eyeing a future role as “roving ambassador,” according to Banks. “To go to places like Denmark and France and say: ‘It’s possible, you can do it as well.’ "
I do not recall a proper Kipper leader thread. Surely the end of Farage is worth noting, and punting on.
I am tidily all green on this one, having backed the field against Woolfe early on, but will be in clover if Broughton wins.
@Philip_Thompson That's fine Philip. Everyone gets to decide for themselves which way they are going to vote, why, what they mean by the vote, which question they think they are answering and what their primary aim is. I was questioning whether an economic liberal's interests could be further by the victory of the Leave Campaign. Clearly they could be furthered by Brexit depending on what Brexit turns out to be. I'm making a tactical voting critique. If you believe in economic liberalism does helping that particular Leave Campaign win further your aims. It's too early to tell but it seems far from obvious that the answer is Yes.
Yes because the campaigns will melt away like the frost in spring while the referendum decision we will live with for forty years probably so vote for what you believe in and stuff everything else, that's tomorrow's battle
It's a revolt against a particular form of liberalism, one that sees internationalism and the free movement of people and capital as the way forward, rather than a revolt against liberalism more generally.
I see free movement of capital, goods and services as totally different to free movement of people.
Why so many others do not, baffles me.
However many Trump and Brexit backers do not. Working class voters in Ohio and the Black Country would be quite happy to have tariffs on imports from Mexico and China (indeed Farage made the argument the EU prevented restrictions being made on cheap Chinese goods)
RCS is right. The probability of an international trade war brought on by Trumpism and Brexitism is quite high.
It's tricky. It's pretty clear that Trump will destroy America (Bush was an economic nightmare, Trump will be considerably worse and congress is too inept to stop him) and that can be very good for the UK. Unfortunately he is likely to take the world with him, which most definitely isn't. Odds on, because of that, that some agent, international or domestic, would 'remove' him if he somehow got elected.
Haha, true. Having visited both several times (admittedly North Wingfield rather than Tupton itself) I'm afraid I'm firmly plumping for Bishops Castle.
Today I learned that the Bolivian establishment, aka the president, have decided to hold a second referendum on presidential terms and whatnot, because they didn't like the result of the first referendum.
That's what REMAINERS want Britain to be: the North Atlantic version of Bolivia, where the public are asked, then overruled.
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
And I'd add free movement of those with job offers. But for your two points and mine on movement of people, I'd hold those back until the EU stated that they were prepared to talk, given our red lines.
Out of interest, on your 'no use of product standards as an NTB, would you say that that would bar the UK from introducing tougher standards than the EU for safety or environmental reasons where those proposed standards are properly backed up by empirical evidence?
Only one in three people thinks that the government is right to increase the number of grammar schools and select more pupils by academic ability, according to a poll for The Times.
YouGov found voters in England gave a lukewarm reception to the prime minister’s domestic policy, which was backed by 34 per cent.
Some 25 per cent urged the reverse, calling on the government to close all grammars. A further 20 per cent said that the existing system, with 164 grammar schools, should be kept as it is. The poll reveals that Mrs May’s initial efforts to win over the country with her plans do not seem to have worked. Support for grammars and academic selection was 38 per cent in early August, before the plans were set out.
"Donald Trump is "really proud" that his crusade against the mainstream media finally paid off this week in the form of a poll that found only 32 percent of Americans trust the press.
"The media has openly been dishonest and I look at that poll and I said, 'wow,' because every speech I talk about it," the Republican presidential nominee told radio host Fred Dickers on Thursday.
Paralympics GB 107 medals and second on the table, fantastic from our athletes on Day 8. They're doing something very special here. https://t.co/VPFqS9Chv5
Whatever is wrong - she's a robot at public appearances. I watched her excuse for a press conf twice and she's no human emotion at all. A teleprompter would have more.
I thought she sounded like a simultaneous translation - if she was being told what to say via an ear bud, I'd believe it. Very weird.
"Donald Trump is "really proud" that his crusade against the mainstream media finally paid off this week in the form of a poll that found only 32 percent of Americans trust the press.
"The media has openly been dishonest and I look at that poll and I said, 'wow,' because every speech I talk about it," the Republican presidential nominee told radio host Fred Dickers on Thursday.
One of the coolest features of Snapchat is their use of "Geofilters" when sending a "snap". A Geofilter is a unique logo or text that the user can apply to the photo via their GPS signal being in an area with the filter available
One of the coolest features of Snapchat is their use of "Geofilters" when sending a "snap". A Geofilter is a unique logo or text that the user can apply to the photo via their GPS signal being in an area with the filter available
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
No free trade without free movement. That's how the EU works. "When you are ready to be sensible" is just inane talk.
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
And I'd add free movement of those with job offers. But for your two points and mine on movement of people, I'd hold those back until the EU stated that they were prepared to talk, given our red lines.
Out of interest, on your 'no use of product standards as an NTB, would you say that that would bar the UK from introducing tougher standards than the EU for safety or environmental reasons where those proposed standards are properly backed up by empirical evidence?
Well, that's certainly the case with NAFTA and the TPP, you're specifically prohibited from using trading standards in that way.
Pretty much all free trade agreements are denuding of sovereignty in this way, because they seek to prevent governments from protecting local industries through regulation. Indeed, the whole purpose of ISDS tribunals is to allow firms who feel they've been disadvantaged through the regulatory process to get redress.
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
No free trade without free movement. That's how the EU works. "When you are ready to be sensible" is just inane talk.
No; it's no membership of the single market without free movement of people. You can have - and the EU has about 30 - free trade agreements without free movement of people.
There are advantages to being in the single market: it drastically cuts down on customs processing, for example, and simplifies the process of selling cross border (and for that matter, allows people to offer things like financials services products from another country). Whether those advantages are sufficient to justify allowing (a degree of) freedom of movement is another matter altogether.
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
And I'd add free movement of those with job offers. But for your two points and mine on movement of people, I'd hold those back until the EU stated that they were prepared to talk, given our red lines.
Out of interest, on your 'no use of product standards as an NTB, would you say that that would bar the UK from introducing tougher standards than the EU for safety or environmental reasons where those proposed standards are properly backed up by empirical evidence?
Well, that's certainly the case with NAFTA and the TPP, you're specifically prohibited from using trading standards in that way.
Pretty much all free trade agreements are denuding of sovereignty in this way, because they seek to prevent governments from protecting local industries through regulation. Indeed, the whole purpose of ISDS tribunals is to allow firms who feel they've been disadvantaged through the regulatory process to get redress.
So, how does NAFTA manage it if they have no inter-governmental process of setting environmental or safety standards? Is it all done through legal challenge?
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
No free trade without free movement. That's how the EU works. "When you are ready to be sensible" is just inane talk.
It may be how the EU works, but regardless of the existence of the EU, free trade promotes economic growth globally (albeit with local winners and losers). That is why the world in general has moved steadily towards freer trade since WWII. Regardless of the terms of the political divorce of Brexit, it still makes economic sense for both sides, not just the UK, for there to be a degree of free trade.
The EU has a (short-term) political, not economic, reason for wanting Brexit to be painful for the UK. If they are determined to emphasize that in Brexit negotiations rather than focus on an optimal economic agreement based on mutual economic interests, then the UK is probably better off both politically and economically in the longer-term if we opt out of negotiations now in favour of a better negotiation process later which can focus on the mutual economic interests, rather than settle for a bad deal now - even if that means more pain in the shorter term for the UK.
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
And I'd add free movement of those with job offers. But for your two points and mine on movement of people, I'd hold those back until the EU stated that they were prepared to talk, given our red lines.
Out of interest, on your 'no use of product standards as an NTB, would you say that that would bar the UK from introducing tougher standards than the EU for safety or environmental reasons where those proposed standards are properly backed up by empirical evidence?
Well, that's certainly the case with NAFTA and the TPP, you're specifically prohibited from using trading standards in that way.
Pretty much all free trade agreements are denuding of sovereignty in this way, because they seek to prevent governments from protecting local industries through regulation. Indeed, the whole purpose of ISDS tribunals is to allow firms who feel they've been disadvantaged through the regulatory process to get redress.
So how does California's vehicular emission controls fit into that?
Having read again the Telegraph piece on EU officials intending to make the UK give up on Brexit by making negotiations too tough, I am more and more convinced that our line should be:
"These are the UK's red lines:
1. No UK contributions to the EU budget 2. UK to control movement of people across its borders 3. UK laws to have primacy 4. UK not subject to ECJ rulings
Now, EU, given these red lines, what are you prepared to offer us. If nothing, then let's just get it over and done with and to the WTO rules. When you are ready to be sensible, let us know."
Free trade in goods; no use of product standards as an NTB. Free trade in services, but no financial passporting.
No free trade without free movement. That's how the EU works. "When you are ready to be sensible" is just inane talk.
It may be how the EU works, but regardless of the existence of the EU, free trade promotes economic growth globally (albeit with local winners and losers). That is why the world in general has moved steadily towards freer trade since WWII. Regardless of the terms of the political divorce of Brexit, it still makes economic sense for both sides, not just the UK, for there to be a degree of free trade.
The EU has a (short-term) political, not economic, reason for wanting Brexit to be painful for the UK. If they are determined to emphasize that in Brexit negotiations rather than focus on an optimal economic agreement based on mutual economic interests, then the UK is probably better off both politically and economically in the longer-term if we opt out of negotiations now in favour of a better negotiation process later which can focus on the mutual economic interests, rather than settle for a bad deal now - even if that means more pain in the shorter term for the UK.
This is all beginning to look somewhat concerning. And reminiscent of some sort of Cold War style arms race where everyone can see that reducing arsenals is the mutually sensible thing to do but the actual outcome is escalation for want of anyone willing to take the first step.
Only one in three people thinks that the government is right to increase the number of grammar schools and select more pupils by academic ability, according to a poll for The Times.
YouGov found voters in England gave a lukewarm reception to the prime minister’s domestic policy, which was backed by 34 per cent.
Some 25 per cent urged the reverse, calling on the government to close all grammars. A further 20 per cent said that the existing system, with 164 grammar schools, should be kept as it is. The poll reveals that Mrs May’s initial efforts to win over the country with her plans do not seem to have worked. Support for grammars and academic selection was 38 per cent in early August, before the plans were set out.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
Only one in three people thinks that the government is right to increase the number of grammar schools and select more pupils by academic ability, according to a poll for The Times.
YouGov found voters in England gave a lukewarm reception to the prime minister’s domestic policy, which was backed by 34 per cent.
Some 25 per cent urged the reverse, calling on the government to close all grammars. A further 20 per cent said that the existing system, with 164 grammar schools, should be kept as it is. The poll reveals that Mrs May’s initial efforts to win over the country with her plans do not seem to have worked. Support for grammars and academic selection was 38 per cent in early August, before the plans were set out.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
People have been known to vote differently at local and Westminster levels.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
It is encouraging.
Farron believes that every council seat matters, and is worth fighting for. The plan of building a number of hotspots in local government, then to fight these as parliamentary seats is a realistic one.
If James is the new Kipper leader, it will be hard to differentiate from the Tories, except for James having better social and presentational skills to May. Policy will be much the same and it leaves a lot of space for the LDs.
Paralympics GB 107 medals and second on the table, fantastic from our athletes on Day 8. They're doing something very special here. https://t.co/VPFqS9Chv5
The success of the Ukraine is very impressive too, even if it baffles me.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
There are two possibilities: either the polls are wrong again or the relationship between local byelections and parliamentary elections is weak.
Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
Paralympics GB 107 medals and second on the table, fantastic from our athletes on Day 8. They're doing something very special here. https://t.co/VPFqS9Chv5
The success of the Ukraine is very impressive too, even if it baffles me.
Paralympics GB 107 medals and second on the table, fantastic from our athletes on Day 8. They're doing something very special here. https://t.co/VPFqS9Chv5
The success of the Ukraine is very impressive too, even if it baffles me.
The success of the Ukraine is very impressive too, even if it baffles me.
Russia typically goes for the same sports to excel in as the Ukraine so they were denied more medals and superior medals to everyone else in the normal olympics. With the paralympics taking a stronger stand with the outright ban, Ukraine has taken advantage.
\Also possibly long term side effects of Chernobyl have helped them develop paralympic excellence ?
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
People have been known to vote differently at local and Westminster levels.
Sure, but getting them to vote LD at a local level is a good place to start.
With no national elections on the cards for 3 years or so, national polls are not terribly meaningful.
A lot of amputees and paraplegics who were formely fit young men too, thanks to Donald's frriend Vladimir. The paralympics started for wounded soldiers.
It is also good to see countries like Nigeria doing so well, rather than the same old cohort.
Does anyone really believe Labour are on 34%?. I find it not credible.
No. But if you are an average non-Tory not really interested or paying much attention to politics right now and you get asked by a pollster today out of the blue, what else are you to say? There is a world of difference between giving an instinctive anti-government response to a pollster and walking deliberately to the polls to cast a knowing vote for Corbyn as PM.
His hair is quite thick for someone at 70, almost certainly dyed - but Hillary's will be too, and hers is also not so thick on top (Her hair stylist has a tough job to do methinks)
His hair is quite thick for someone at 70, almost certainly dyed - but Hillary's will be too, and hers is also not so thick on top (Her hair stylist has a tough job to do methinks)
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
There are two possibilities: either the polls are wrong again or the relationship between local byelections and parliamentary elections is weak.
Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
Someone on here yesterday showed that the latest poll 'adjusted' the raw response which had LDs above UKIP to show the percentages the other way round. Maybe there is a scientific reason for this, surely it's not to make the results match expectations.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
It is encouraging.
Farron believes that every council seat matters, and is worth fighting for. The plan of building a number of hotspots in local government, then to fight these as parliamentary seats is a realistic one.
If James is the new Kipper leader, it will be hard to differentiate from the Tories, except for James having better social and presentational skills to May. Policy will be much the same and it leaves a lot of space for the LDs.
Which is interesting but doesn't resolve the dilemma of what the LDs stand for at a national level - will triangulation ever return? If so, Farron is not the person who can do it.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
There are two possibilities: either the polls are wrong again or the relationship between local byelections and parliamentary elections is weak.
Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
Someone on here yesterday showed that the latest poll 'adjusted' the raw response which had LDs above UKIP to show the percentages the other way round. Maybe there is a scientific reason for this, surely it's not to make the results match expectations.
A lot of amputees and paraplegics who were formely fit young men too, thanks to Donald's frriend Vladimir. The paralympics started for wounded soldiers.
It is also good to see countries like Nigeria doing so well, rather than the same old cohort.
Disappointing to see Saudi Arabia performing poorly given their commitment to widening the pool of locals available.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
There are two possibilities: either the polls are wrong again or the relationship between local byelections and parliamentary elections is weak. Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
But if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they did not stand before, Mr Quidder, is this not a sign that something unusual is happening?
Likewise if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they made little effort last time?
His hair is quite thick for someone at 70, almost certainly dyed - but Hillary's will be too, and hers is also not so thick on top (Her hair stylist has a tough job to do methinks)
Trumps hair is befuddling because clearly so much effort goes into it.
Another day of trending Trump in the US. Unless this reverses he will be ahead in the averages within the week. A possibility that might well cause that reverse of course.
Hillary just looks unwell but the truth is she has never been a great campaigner. Trump is a natural, honed for the superficial, personality driven sound bite era in which we live. Unless he screws up irredeemably he is going to win.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
There are two possibilities: either the polls are wrong again or the relationship between local byelections and parliamentary elections is weak. Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
But if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they did not stand before, Mr Quidder, is this not a sign that something unusual is happening?
Likewise if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they made little effort last time?
The Lib Dems are clearly now on the way up.
Whatever the link between Westminster and locals, and I accept that the Lib Dems can do better in the latter where limited resources can be better focussed, it shows that the IPSOS Mori poll yesterday where they were at 6% is pants.
The local by elections tonight confirm the weekly trend of massive swings to the Lib Dems in many Midland and Northern Labour seats. I find it unbelievable that the national polling figures for that party are in single figures.
There are two possibilities: either the polls are wrong again or the relationship between local byelections and parliamentary elections is weak. Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
But if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they did not stand before, Mr Quidder, is this not a sign that something unusual is happening?
Likewise if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they made little effort last time?
Comments
"Deselect asap" https://t.co/xchYzsMcDs
LD +38% Lab -32% Con -15%
https://twitter.com/DailyMail/status/776554014112641028
I am tidily all green on this one, having backed the field against Woolfe early on, but will be in clover if Broughton wins.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/15/diane-james-favourite-ukip-leader-party-conference?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Did Channel 4 learn nothing from Top Gear ?
Might go down well with Sainsburys shoppers in Essex, that's about it though.
East Herts -8.9%
Newcastle -20.0%
NE Derbyshire -32.4%
Carlisle -3.4%
Shropshire — no candidate last time, this time they polled 6.7% in third place.
https://youtu.be/Mi0HaFHEY-I
Out of interest, on your 'no use of product standards as an NTB, would you say that that would bar the UK from introducing tougher standards than the EU for safety or environmental reasons where those proposed standards are properly backed up by empirical evidence?
YouGov found voters in England gave a lukewarm reception to the prime minister’s domestic policy, which was backed by 34 per cent.
Some 25 per cent urged the reverse, calling on the government to close all grammars. A further 20 per cent said that the existing system, with 164 grammar schools, should be kept as it is. The poll reveals that Mrs May’s initial efforts to win over the country with her plans do not seem to have worked. Support for grammars and academic selection was 38 per cent in early August, before the plans were set out.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/most-voters-reject-grammar-school-expansion-jnw825xk9
"Donald Trump is "really proud" that his crusade against the mainstream media finally paid off this week in the form of a poll that found only 32 percent of Americans trust the press.
"The media has openly been dishonest and I look at that poll and I said, 'wow,' because every speech I talk about it," the Republican presidential nominee told radio host Fred Dickers on Thursday.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2601929/
Trump for 2016
First update from our campaign for yesterday! #Trump2016
https://t.co/SXeGO3p90P https://t.co/czFeG7TnMs
Heavy rain in London tomorrow. Hope the tube stations don't get flooded again.
107 medals and second on the table, fantastic from our athletes on Day 8. They're doing something very special here. https://t.co/VPFqS9Chv5
I thought she sounded like a simultaneous translation - if she was being told what to say via an ear bud, I'd believe it. Very weird.
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/black-lives-matter-activist-changes-tune-on-police-following-robbery/?mod=sm_tw_post
as for the D accusing people of being dishonest..
well, we really are through into the looking glass world
Source: your link
NEW: Clinton postpones answering court ordered email questions due to "campaign business" https://t.co/E9XcJRFdxK https://t.co/y7GfJKpyg4
https://youtu.be/WYYGKOy6xhI
Pretty much all free trade agreements are denuding of sovereignty in this way, because they seek to prevent governments from protecting local industries through regulation. Indeed, the whole purpose of ISDS tribunals is to allow firms who feel they've been disadvantaged through the regulatory process to get redress.
There are advantages to being in the single market: it drastically cuts down on customs processing, for example, and simplifies the process of selling cross border (and for that matter, allows people to offer things like financials services products from another country). Whether those advantages are sufficient to justify allowing (a degree of) freedom of movement is another matter altogether.
The EU has a (short-term) political, not economic, reason for wanting Brexit to be painful for the UK. If they are determined to emphasize that in Brexit negotiations rather than focus on an optimal economic agreement based on mutual economic interests, then the UK is probably better off both politically and economically in the longer-term if we opt out of negotiations now in favour of a better negotiation process later which can focus on the mutual economic interests, rather than settle for a bad deal now - even if that means more pain in the shorter term for the UK.
Rather spooky
Trump passionately fighting for Harlem! #VoteTrump https://t.co/100zDiys4F
#Latest @TPM Electoral Map
(270 EV Needed):
Clinton 254
Trump 242
Toss-up 42
https://t.co/rgmXjpeHU7
Via @joshtpm https://t.co/KYpS6SzZwA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVd1LuadnDk
http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2016/09/15/nancy-pelosi-suggests-gun-control-vote-could-save-90-lives/
The Mason plan:
(1) ignore abuse
(2) goad abused when they react
(3) deselect
(4) ??????
(5) Labour government https://t.co/OAvIBfevVb
YouGov found voters in England gave a lukewarm reception to the prime minister’s domestic policy, which was backed by 34 per cent.
Some 25 per cent urged the reverse, calling on the government to close all grammars. A further 20 per cent said that the existing system, with 164 grammar schools, should be kept as it is. The poll reveals that Mrs May’s initial efforts to win over the country with her plans do not seem to have worked. Support for grammars and academic selection was 38 per cent in early August, before the plans were set out.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/most-voters-reject-grammar-school-expansion-jnw825xk9
May seems to be going for the 35% strategy.
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Tupton (North East Derbyshire) result:
LDEM: 38.3% (+38.3)
LAB: 34.7% (-32.4)
CON: 17.5% (-15.4)
UKIP: 8.9% (+8.9)
BPP: 0.7% (+0.7)
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Liberal Democrat GAIN Tupton (North East Derbyshire) from Labour.
Britain Elects @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Bishop's Castle (Shropshire) result:
LDEM: 60.5% (-1.5)
CON: 30.2% (-0.5)
LAB: 6.7% (+6.7)
GRN: 2.6% (-4.7)
Britain Elects @britainelects 7h7 hours ago
Liberal Democrat HOLD Bishop's Castle (Shropshire).
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Castle (Carlisle) result:
LAB: 46.5% (+9.2)
CON: 26.7% (+7.7)
UKIP: 12.5% (-10.4)
LDEM: 10.3% (-0.6)
GRN: 4.0% (-3.5)
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Labour HOLD Castle (Carlisle).
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Blakelaw (Newcastle upon Tyne) result:
LAB: 43.2% (-20.0)
LDEM: 28.1% (+19.0)
UKIP: 19.1% (+3.0)
CON: 5.1% (-2.4)
GRN: 4.5% (+0.5)
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Labour HOLD Blakelaw (Newcastle upon Tyne).
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Puckeridge (East Hertfordshire) result:
CON: 42.9% (-24.6)
UKIP: 18.9% (+18.9)
LDEM: 18.0% (+18.0)
LAB: 11.0% (-8.9)
GRN: 9.1% (-3.5)
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
Conservative HOLD Puckeridge (East Hertfordshire).
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37380666
Farron believes that every council seat matters, and is worth fighting for. The plan of building a number of hotspots in local government, then to fight these as parliamentary seats is a realistic one.
If James is the new Kipper leader, it will be hard to differentiate from the Tories, except for James having better social and presentational skills to May. Policy will be much the same and it leaves a lot of space for the LDs.
Does anyone really believe Labour are on 34%?. I find it not credible.
Now, I understand that you would choose the first of these. But you do seem to have overlooked that these "massive swings" are mostly in places where the LDs either didn't stand last time or stood but made no effort.
Russia typically goes for the same sports to excel in as the Ukraine so they were denied more medals and superior medals to everyone else in the normal olympics. With the paralympics taking a stronger stand with the outright ban, Ukraine has taken advantage.
\Also possibly long term side effects of Chernobyl have helped them develop paralympic excellence ?
What's the thing that America talks today about Trump ?
His economic policy ? Nope
His social policy ? Nope
His hair on Jimmy Fallon:
https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/776605776962084864
And then we wonder why this election is tied.
With no national elections on the cards for 3 years or so, national polls are not terribly meaningful.
I use the word tad decidedly.
A lot of amputees and paraplegics who were formely fit young men too, thanks to Donald's frriend Vladimir. The paralympics started for wounded soldiers.
It is also good to see countries like Nigeria doing so well, rather than the same old cohort.
Likewise if the Lib Dems are now winning seats where they made little effort last time?
The Lib Dems are clearly now on the way up.
Hillary just looks unwell but the truth is she has never been a great campaigner. Trump is a natural, honed for the superficial, personality driven sound bite era in which we live. Unless he screws up irredeemably he is going to win.
Gulp.