Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn now has YouGov “best PM” lead amongst the 18-24s but

2

Comments

  • I've always opposed Heathrow expansion but frankly post Brexit it makes sense. If your open, outward looking and reading nation accidentally does something as stupid as Brexit you need to take corrective action quickly. For all it's short comings Heathrow expansion is without doubt ( a) something ( b) an expansive, opening, internationalist and globalising move. ( c) a response to Brexit that doesn't reward a certain sort of Brexiteers. To over simplify Heathrow reinforces London and the South East's preeminence in the UK economy. The worst thing we could do is poor unproductive capital into some town that's just blamed all it's problems on Foreigners. The sooner we Leave voters realise they've voted for a different flavour of globalisation not to stop globalisation the better. I know see Heathrow expansion as a form of political and economic air bag. Something you hope you'd never use but if you've crashed the car essential to use. If May needs to delay a decision for a few weeks to achieve closure on a decision that's already been delayed decades then so be it.

    Heathrow's largest shareholder is Spanish. Why give them a free pass in a post-Brexit world?

    Find a British owned airport and let them expand.
    Gatwick seems a no brainer to me. All the infrastructure is there except the Runway. Motorways and right on the main railway line with dozens of trains an hour

    I'm really not convinced that the area around Heathrow could cope.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    HYUFD said:

    They are not forced to but if they are late developers and still want to go to a grammar school why not?

    I was more thinking of the parents making them do it three times. But if they are late developers,and want to do it then I agree why not.
    Indeed
  • I've always opposed Heathrow expansion but frankly post Brexit it makes sense. If your open, outward looking and reading nation accidentally does something as stupid as Brexit you need to take corrective action quickly. For all it's short comings Heathrow expansion is without doubt ( a) something ( b) an expansive, opening, internationalist and globalising move. ( c) a response to Brexit that doesn't reward a certain sort of Brexiteers. To over simplify Heathrow reinforces London and the South East's preeminence in the UK economy. The worst thing we could do is poor unproductive capital into some town that's just blamed all it's problems on Foreigners. The sooner we Leave voters realise they've voted for a different flavour of globalisation not to stop globalisation the better. I know see Heathrow expansion as a form of political and economic air bag. Something you hope you'd never use but if you've crashed the car essential to use. If May needs to delay a decision for a few weeks to achieve closure on a decision that's already been delayed decades then so be it.

    Heathrow's largest shareholder is Spanish. Why give them a free pass in a post-Brexit world?

    Find a British owned airport and let them expand.
    You sum the coming schism in the temporary Leave coalition of voters very neatly. If Heathrow expansion is an accelerant of that schism* so much the better.

    * Schism may of course be too strong. Dissolution maybe. In any case new alliances and coalition's are needed now. The more I think of it the more converted to Heathrow expansion I become as a response to the LEAVE event.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
  • glwglw Posts: 10,018

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
  • glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    He wont be a dictator though. Enough crap presidents and Congress might insist on appointing an experienced member of the house of representative to advise him......
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most grammars also have an entry at 13 and 16

    At 16, yes, for the sixth form, and that's two-way traffic, with some leaving to do A-levels or other things elsewhere. I've not heard of entry at 13 though, at least not here in Birmingham.
    In Bucks there is certainly entry at 13+ though often administered by schools themselves
    http://www.rgshw.com/1861/admissions/application-for-late-entrance-sept-2017
    From that site:

    "Please note that the testing does not imply that there are spaces but allows us to establish a waiting list of suitable boys should a place become available."

    That gives the impression that entry after 13 is only possible if places are freed up by other kids leaving, rather than being a normal means of entry.
    Well obviously if we had more new grammar schools there would be more places available for those who passed the 13 plus wouldn't there! In fact no reason you could not have grammars whose main entry is at 13 or even 16 rather than 11
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    They are not forced to but if they are late developers and still want to go to a grammar school why not?

    I was more thinking of the parents making them do it three times. But if they are late developers,and want to do it then I agree why not.
    Indeed
    I'm pretty sure kids don't normally take a test to enter at 16. Entry to the sixth form of the grammar schools that I'm familiar with depends on GCSE grades.
  • HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    tlg86 said:

    chestnut said:

    From the graph in the article Corbyn just has to stick it out for 40 years to get a majority of the voters turning out for him.

    He's home and dry if all the under 25s can stay in education (avoid mortgages, families etc) until they reach pension age.
    Could very easily happen!
    If all under 25s avoid mortgages, don't work and have no families, not only will the housing market and economy collapse but humanity will become extinct, so we may have more on our plate to worry about!
  • glwglw Posts: 10,018

    He wont be a dictator though. Enough crap presidents and Congress might insist on appointing an experienced member of the house of representative to advise him......

    I agree that Trump will find that his powers in practice are limited, but that's not a reason to vote for him. Essentially saying "don't worry Congress will muzzle him" acknowledges that left to his own devices he'd be rubbish or worse.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,591
    glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    They are not forced to but if they are late developers and still want to go to a grammar school why not?

    I was more thinking of the parents making them do it three times. But if they are late developers,and want to do it then I agree why not.
    Indeed
    I'm pretty sure kids don't normally take a test to enter at 16. Entry to the sixth form of the grammar schools that I'm familiar with depends on GCSE grades.
    That is often the case but there is still entry at 16, 11 is not a complete cut off point
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,566
    edited September 2016
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most grammars also have an entry at 13 and 16

    At 16, yes, for the sixth form, and that's two-way traffic, with some leaving to do A-levels or other things elsewhere. I've not heard of entry at 13 though, at least not here in Birmingham.
    In Bucks there is certainly entry at 13+ though often administered by schools themselves
    http://www.rgshw.com/1861/admissions/application-for-late-entrance-sept-2017
    From that site:

    "Please note that the testing does not imply that there are spaces but allows us to establish a waiting list of suitable boys should a place become available."

    That gives the impression that entry after 13 is only possible if places are freed up by other kids leaving, rather than being a normal means of entry.
    Well obviously if we had more new grammar schools there would be more places available for those who passed the 13 plus wouldn't there!
    Only if they operated differently to current grammar schools and reserved more places for older children. Edit: or threw out some kids to make room for the new ones!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced candidates ever to have run for president
    Correction:

    Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced corrupt candidates ever to have run for president
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,755
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    On current results, UKIP will do very well in Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Lincolnshire, the South Coast, but fall back elsewhere. But, who knows where we'll be in May.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,591
    Liverpool are in the top four :)
  • glwglw Posts: 10,018
    Sandpit said:

    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.

    There's certainly something seriously wrong with a system that leads to something like Cherie Blair versus Alan Sugar.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.
    I disagree, none of the candidates on earth, Jeb Bush, Rubio, Kasich, Cruz, Sanders etc were much to write home about. Whatever you think about them Trump and Clinton, one a billionaire, one a former Senator and Secretary of State, are actually more qualified than many recent candidates we have had in US general elections
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most grammars also have an entry at 13 and 16

    At 16, yes, for the sixth form, and that's two-way traffic, with some leaving to do A-levels or other things elsewhere. I've not heard of entry at 13 though, at least not here in Birmingham.
    In Bucks there is certainly entry at 13+ though often administered by schools themselves
    http://www.rgshw.com/1861/admissions/application-for-late-entrance-sept-2017
    From that site:

    "Please note that the testing does not imply that there are spaces but allows us to establish a waiting list of suitable boys should a place become available."

    That gives the impression that entry after 13 is only possible if places are freed up by other kids leaving, rather than being a normal means of entry.
    Well obviously if we had more new grammar schools there would be more places available for those who passed the 13 plus wouldn't there!
    Only if they operated differently to current grammar schools and reserved more places for older children. Edit: or threw out some kids to make room for the new ones!
    As I said there could even be new grammars with entries only at 13 or 16
  • glw said:

    He wont be a dictator though. Enough crap presidents and Congress might insist on appointing an experienced member of the house of representative to advise him......

    I agree that Trump will find that his powers in practice are limited, but that's not a reason to vote for him. Essentially saying "don't worry Congress will muzzle him" acknowledges that left to his own devices he'd be rubbish or worse.
    Supporting Trump with the claim that he doesn't mean what he says, or won't be able to do what he says - is the height of recklessness and stupidity.

    He has baited the media, successfully, with a campaign of racist, misogynist grotesquerie.

    Surprised the amount of folks on here with latent fascist tendencies.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    MP_SE said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced candidates ever to have run for president
    Correction:

    Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced corrupt candidates ever to have run for president
    Nixon was corrupt, so arguably was LBJ, however both got things done even with the corruption
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    Another UKIP councillor in Cambs has just defected to the Conservatives in the last 48 hours they are rotting away from the inside . .
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Corbyn and Farron are the only male party leaders left in Britain.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    On current results, UKIP will do very well in Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Lincolnshire, the South Coast, but fall back elsewhere. But, who knows where we'll be in May.
    Imdeed but all the pro UKIP areas you suggest have elections next May, none of Corbyn's metropolitan heartlands do
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    glw said:

    Sandpit said:

    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.

    There's certainly something seriously wrong with a system that leads to something like Cherie Blair versus Alan Sugar.
    Why? They would both be more qualified than Corbyn, arguably May too
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    MaxPB said:

    Strong words from Renzi today. Clearly he's absolutely seething over Italy's inability to bail out its banking sector. That's the most important development from the EU meeting.

    Events in Italy could easily culminate in the country quitting the Euro. In fact, that might even be inevitable: some analysts maintain that Italy has already slipped over the event horizon of a Grecian-style debt vortex - i.e. the point at which austerity and running a surplus fails to prevent the debt to GDP ratio from rising continually, no matter how extreme the measures become - and that the only reasonable response to this (as well as to the progressive hollowing out of Italian industry, and the disastrous economic condition all round of the southern half of the country) is a return to the lira, an immediate and substantial devaluation, and a very large sovereign debt default (whether unilateral or through an agreed restructuring, it would amount to much the same thing.)

    Italy is too important and far too big either to bail or to bully in the same fashion as Greece. And an Italian exit from the Euro would arguably be a far more devastating blow to the EU than Brexit. We spent decades gradually distancing ourselves from the core project. whereas Italy is a founder thereof, and the departure of a major member from the Eurozone would represent the first really big outright reversal in the history of "ever-closer union."
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820

    glw said:

    He wont be a dictator though. Enough crap presidents and Congress might insist on appointing an experienced member of the house of representative to advise him......

    I agree that Trump will find that his powers in practice are limited, but that's not a reason to vote for him. Essentially saying "don't worry Congress will muzzle him" acknowledges that left to his own devices he'd be rubbish or worse.
    Supporting Trump with the claim that he doesn't mean what he says, or won't be able to do what he says - is the height of recklessness and stupidity.

    He has baited the media, successfully, with a campaign of racist, misogynist grotesquerie.

    Surprised the amount of folks on here with latent fascist tendencies.

    #CNN says #Hillary team in 2008 never raised #birther issue. #SidBlumenthal, long-time #HRC buddy, told me in person #Obama born in #kenya

    — James Asher (@jimasher) September 16, 2016
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    Another UKIP councillor in Cambs has just defected to the Conservatives in the last 48 hours they are rotting away from the inside . .
    Correction, they were rotting away...now they have a leader who is more appealing than the actual leader of the opposition and they will be able to hold May to account next year on signs of even the faintest compromise once the Brexit talks get under way
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    MaxPB said:

    Strong words from Renzi today. Clearly he's absolutely seething over Italy's inability to bail out its banking sector. That's the most important development from the EU meeting.

    Events in Italy could easily culminate in the country quitting the Euro. In fact, that might even be inevitable: some analysts maintain that Italy has already slipped over the event horizon of a Grecian-style debt vortex - i.e. the point at which austerity and running a surplus fails to prevent the debt to GDP ratio from rising continually, no matter how extreme the measures become - and that the only reasonable response to this (as well as to the progressive hollowing out of Italian industry, and the disastrous economic condition all round of the southern half of the country) is a return to the lira, an immediate and substantial devaluation, and a very large sovereign debt default (whether unilateral or through an agreed restructuring, it would amount to much the same thing.)

    Italy is too important and far too big either to bail or to bully in the same fashion as Greece. And an Italian exit from the Euro would arguably be a far more devastating blow to the EU than Brexit. We spent decades gradually distancing ourselves from the core project. whereas Italy is a founder thereof, and the departure of a major member from the Eurozone would represent the first really big outright reversal in the history of "ever-closer union."
    Italy is in a difficult place, though ironically it has the largest trade surplus in the G7
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    I really feel you are seriously overestimating the salience of the EU /Brexit as an electoral issue. Most people feel they have voted and made a decision - and wish to move on. Few people will remain so fixated on it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,591
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.
    I disagree, none of the candidates on earth, Jeb Bush, Rubio, Kasich, Cruz, Sanders etc were much to write home about. Whatever you think about them Trump and Clinton, one a billionaire, one a former Senator and Secretary of State, are actually more qualified than many recent candidates we have had in US general elections
    On paper, the two candidates are eminently qualified, and the sort of people that should end up in high office. But these two personalities are the worst to ever contest the presidential election. Both absolute narcissists, one closer in language to Nick Griffin than Nigel Farage, the other having no idea how classified documents are handled and only interested in talking to people who give her money personally.

    I suggested last week that we postpone the election six months and start the whole damn process again with clean skins. Let's have Paul Ryan vs Elizabeth Warren, with a genuine polite debate about policies and vision for the future - rather than watching these two clowns throw bricks at each other for another six weeks.
  • Perhaps the best get out clause would be to invoke it 'unconstitutionally' without a parliamentary vote leaving open the option of having it overturned by a UK court. In those circumstances the EU wouldn't be able to accept it based on the treaty text.
  • Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited September 2016
    Oh stop clutching straws. End of. May knows that any attempt to weasel out of it would just hand the votes she needs for a majority in 2020 to Dianne James UKIP on a plate.

    The conservative party cares first and foremost about Power. They want a decent majority. To do that they need the kippers back. Hence no surrender on Brexit and grammar schools
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
  • weejonnie said:

    glw said:

    He wont be a dictator though. Enough crap presidents and Congress might insist on appointing an experienced member of the house of representative to advise him......

    I agree that Trump will find that his powers in practice are limited, but that's not a reason to vote for him. Essentially saying "don't worry Congress will muzzle him" acknowledges that left to his own devices he'd be rubbish or worse.
    Supporting Trump with the claim that he doesn't mean what he says, or won't be able to do what he says - is the height of recklessness and stupidity.

    He has baited the media, successfully, with a campaign of racist, misogynist grotesquerie.

    Surprised the amount of folks on here with latent fascist tendencies.

    #CNN says #Hillary team in 2008 never raised #birther issue. #SidBlumenthal, long-time #HRC buddy, told me in person #Obama born in #kenya

    — James Asher (@jimasher) September 16, 2016
    What's your point?
    No-one is holding Hilary up as the perfect candidate.

    Seeking to draw equivalence between Clinton and Trump is straight from the loony right playbook.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783
    It is amazing that anyone could write an article on that subject without even mentioning the explicit statement in Article 50 about automatic exit two years after notification:
    "The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period."

    I haven't seen anyone suggest a way around that yet.
  • HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.
    I disagree, none of the candidates on earth, Jeb Bush, Rubio, Kasich, Cruz, Sanders etc were much to write home about. Whatever you think about them Trump and Clinton, one a billionaire, one a former Senator and Secretary of State, are actually more qualified than many recent candidates we have had in US general elections
    I completely agree. The received wisdom about Trump and Clinton being uniquely weak candidates doesn't stand up. Clinton's highly professional campaign would have much preferred a conventional Republican to chew up, and Trump has proven that he can out-campaign most conventional politicians.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    But UKIP did so well at the 2013 County Council elections in 2013 because they took place barely two months after their strong performance at the Eastleigh by election. Without that boost and consequent momentum they would have flopped. There is no reason to expect a similar boost for them next Feb/March to propel them to success in May.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
    try.
    Another pbCOMer who is willing Trump to victory.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
    You need to apply some joined up thinking to your two statements.

    Trump is the only candidate, indeed probably the only Western politician, who sees forming a true alliance with Russia as being of strategic importance.
  • tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
    try.
    Another pbCOMer who is willing Trump to victory.
    I think you've mistaken my sentiment.
    A Trump victory would be an obscenity.
  • Chris said:

    I haven't seen anyone suggest a way around that yet.

    I did so below. Invoke it in a way that is open to domestic challenge.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,018

    Trump is the only candidate, indeed probably the only Western politician, who sees forming a true alliance with Russia as being of strategic importance.

    That's another reason not to vote Trump. Trump's crush on Putin is one of the worst things about the man.

  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
    You need to apply some joined up thinking to your two statements.

    Trump is the only candidate, indeed probably the only Western politician, who sees forming a true alliance with Russia as being of strategic importance.

    Does Trump want to "tear the wall down" between East & West?

    Hmm. Where have I heard that before?

  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    lection of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    On current results, UKIP will do very well in Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Lincolnshire, the South Coast, but fall back elsewhere. But, who knows where we'll be in May.
    Lincs ? 16 councillors elected in 2013 down to 12 now will lose 3 more due to boundary changes down to around 5 next May
    West Sussex 10 elected in 2013 down to 9 now will lose 1 more due to boundary changes will be down to 4 next May
    Hants 10 elected 2013 down to 8 now will be down to 1 or 2 at best next May
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,334
    .
    tyson said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
    try.
    Another pbCOMer who is willing Trump to victory.
    I notice the PM of vibrant Italy laid into the EU today. Might not be long until Itexit, tyson. What will you do if that happens?
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    edited September 2016

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May

    Very unlikely in my opinion.

    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election

    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September

    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no

    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .

    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election

    Dream On !!

    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!

    Another UKIP councillor in Cambs has just defected to the Conservatives in the last 48 hours they are rotting away from the inside . .

    Correction, they were rotting away...now they have a leader who is more appealing than the actual leader of the opposition and they will be able to hold May to account next year on signs of even the faintest compromise once the Brexit talks get under way

    perdix said UKIP will hold May to account for any Brexit compromise? What kind od Brexit do they want? Out of the Single Market? Trade under WTO rules? UKIP never had a plan except to throw off all links with the EU. They never said what should follow - that's the difficult bit.

  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    A Trump win would indeed make the world say Wow; it would signify a clear milestone for the decline of American hegemonic power.

    Good article in the FT today about the rising alliance between China and Russia...
    You need to apply some joined up thinking to your two statements.

    Trump is the only candidate, indeed probably the only Western politician, who sees forming a true alliance with Russia as being of strategic importance.
    Indeed, a further disqualification for office.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.
    I disagree, none of the candidates on earth, Jeb Bush, Rubio, Kasich, Cruz, Sanders etc were much to write home about. Whatever you think about them Trump and Clinton, one a billionaire, one a former Senator and Secretary of State, are actually more qualified than many recent candidates we have had in US general elections
    I completely agree. The received wisdom about Trump and Clinton being uniquely weak candidates doesn't stand up. Clinton's highly professional campaign would have much preferred a conventional Republican to chew up, and Trump has proven that he can out-campaign most conventional politicians.
    I agree, either would be more effective presidents in my view than say a President Kerry or Romney or Gore would have been, or George W Bush actually was. They may not be particularly likeable but they are both tough and ruthless when needed
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    I really feel you are seriously overestimating the salience of the EU /Brexit as an electoral issue. Most people feel they have voted and made a decision - and wish to move on. Few people will remain so fixated on it.
    Really? EU ref had the highest turnout of any election since 1992 and Brexit has not even been triggered yet, it will dominate politics until the general election
  • tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016
    Sandpit said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    glw said:

    I suppose what I am trying to say is that there is a whiff of Wimbledon getting to the cup final about Trump. Candicacy was seen as a joke and he has taken on both parties establishments with an unlovely but effective long ball game that has shown modern refined media savvy sophistication for the bullshit it is.

    It certainly true that Trump was meant to have imploded months ago, and yet is neck and neck with Hilary, and to a degree if you are interested in politics you do want to see how far he can go. That said he's plainly unsuitable for high office, and only in the running because he faces someone almost as awful.
    It will be worth watching how the two parties react to this election, knowing that if either of them had selected someone else they'd have got a landslide win.

    The Republicans allowed a big personality to dominate a huge field of candidates, whereas the Democrats came as close as you'll ever see to an establishment stitch-up. Maybe there's an optimum number of candidates to be involved at the start, a choice from half a dozen should allow most sides of a party to be represented in the debates.
    I disagree, none of the candidates on earth, Jeb Bush, Rubio, Kasich, Cruz, Sanders etc were much to write home about. Whatever you think about them Trump and Clinton, one a billionaire, one a former Senator and Secretary of State, are actually more qualified than many recent candidates we have had in US general elections
    On paper, the two candidates are eminently qualified, and the sort of people that should end up in high office. But these two personalities are the worst to ever contest the presidential election. Both absolute narcissists, one closer in language to Nick Griffin than Nigel Farage, the other having no idea how classified documents are handled and only interested in talking to people who give her money personally.

    I suggested last week that we postpone the election six months and start the whole damn process again with clean skins. Let's have Paul Ryan vs Elizabeth Warren, with a genuine polite debate about policies and vision for the future - rather than watching these two clowns throw bricks at each other for another six weeks.
    Paul Ryan? Likeable enough pretty boy but lost in 2012 on the bottom half of the Romney ticket and has done little as Speaker, Warren has only been a Senator for a few years and has little on offer other than standard anti Wall Street fare!
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Really?

    You are plainly an alcoholic (that sort of "amusing" incident with the chianti and the sofa happens all the time to drunks, and not at all to other people) and I think it clouds your judgment. But if you are right surely that is a good reason to stay away?
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    @Maxpb- Italy hosts two of the better European leaders...Renzi, and of course Francis...
  • Chris said:

    It is amazing that anyone could write an article on that subject without even mentioning the explicit statement in Article 50 about automatic exit two years after notification:
    "The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period."

    I haven't seen anyone suggest a way around that yet.
    If the notification had been revoked then the exit 2 years after notification wouldn't happen as there would be no notification. The question is can it be revoked ?
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most grammars also have an entry at 13 and 16

    At 16, yes, for the sixth form, and that's two-way traffic, with some leaving to do A-levels or other things elsewhere. I've not heard of entry at 13 though, at least not here in Birmingham.
    In Bucks there is certainly entry at 13+ though often administered by schools themselves
    http://www.rgshw.com/1861/admissions/application-for-late-entrance-sept-2017
    From that site:

    "Please note that the testing does not imply that there are spaces but allows us to establish a waiting list of suitable boys should a place become available."

    That gives the impression that entry after 13 is only possible if places are freed up by other kids leaving, rather than being a normal means of entry.
    Well obviously if we had more new grammar schools there would be more places available for those who passed the 13 plus wouldn't there!
    Only if they operated differently to current grammar schools and reserved more places for older children. Edit: or threw out some kids to make room for the new ones!
    As I said there could even be new grammars with entries only at 13 or 16
    Grammar schools with entry only at 16 already effectively exist - they're called 6th form colleges. Grammar schools with entry at 13 might work, but I can't see the comprehensives being too chuffed about losing their main role models halfway through their schooling!

    As others have already said, this emphasis on picking out and specially educating an elite group of students is completely the wrong approach. If we are to have different types of school, then the non-grammar schools need to be seen as providing an equally viable technical education for the less academic, not just as a place to dump the losers who failed to get to grammar school.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,334
    tyson said:

    @Maxpb- Italy hosts two of the better European leaders...Renzi, and of course Francis...

    And it was Renzi who just called the EU a bunch of shitheads, possibly referendum posturing, but given the state of Italy's banks, probably the truth.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    The other thing you get here if you consistently challenge the right wing orthodoxy is a whole lot of personal abuse.

    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783

    If the notification had been revoked then the exit 2 years after notification wouldn't happen as there would be no notification.

    Oh, sure - all you need for that argument to work is a time machine.
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    glw said:

    Trump is the only candidate, indeed probably the only Western politician, who sees forming a true alliance with Russia as being of strategic importance.

    That's another reason not to vote Trump. Trump's crush on Putin is one of the worst things about the man.

    I think you'll find in a recent speech that Trump says "I don't like him, I don't dislike him, I don't know him". But of course never let facts get in the way of prejudice.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    perdix said:


    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May

    Very unlikely in my opinion.

    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election

    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September

    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no

    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .

    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election

    Dream On !!

    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!

    Another UKIP councillor in Cambs has just defected to the Conservatives in the last 48 hours they are rotting away from the inside . .

    Correction, they were rotting away...now they have a leader who is more appealing than the actual leader of the opposition and they will be able to hold May to account next year on signs of even the faintest compromise once the Brexit talks get under way

    perdix said UKIP will hold May to account for any Brexit compromise? What kind od Brexit do they want? Out of the Single Market? Trade under WTO rules? UKIP never had a plan except to throw off all links with the EU. They never said what should follow - that's the difficult bit.



    Out of the Single Market and no free movement and points based immigration and no contributions to the EU, as Farage and James have made clear. May will almost certainly not deliver that in its entirety
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,334

    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
    What's wrong with disliking them all, Trump. Putin and the EU. I loathe all of them.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    lection of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    On current results, UKIP will do very well in Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Lincolnshire, the South Coast, but fall back elsewhere. But, who knows where we'll be in May.
    Lincs ? 16 councillors elected in 2013 down to 12 now will lose 3 more due to boundary changes down to around 5 next May
    West Sussex 10 elected in 2013 down to 9 now will lose 1 more due to boundary changes will be down to 4 next May
    Hants 10 elected 2013 down to 8 now will be down to 1 or 2 at best next May
    UKIP have more County Councillors than Labour in Hampshire and West Sussex and the same in Lincs and Corbyn is certainly not going to change that next year!
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    I really feel you are seriously overestimating the salience of the EU /Brexit as an electoral issue. Most people feel they have voted and made a decision - and wish to move on. Few people will remain so fixated on it.
    Really? EU ref had the highest turnout of any election since 1992 and Brexit has not even been triggered yet, it will dominate politics until the general election
    The high turnout owed much to the fact that the campaign had gone on for so long and to some extent reflected the desire to be done with the issue. There is very little polling evidence to suggest it is a particularly salient issue per se at a General Election, and I believe that increasingly people will come to see it as a dead issue - unless May really went back on Brexit .
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,571
    edited September 2016
    weejonnie said:

    glw said:

    Trump is the only candidate, indeed probably the only Western politician, who sees forming a true alliance with Russia as being of strategic importance.

    That's another reason not to vote Trump. Trump's crush on Putin is one of the worst things about the man.

    I think you'll find in a recent speech that Trump says "I don't like him, I don't dislike him, I don't know him". But of course never let facts get in the way of prejudice.
    Trump's whole campaign is a preference for prejudice and an avoidance of fact.

    Clear to anyone with eyes and ears, and/or not on the Russian payroll.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    I don't entirely agree, what America does not need now is an inspirational leader but a tough, competent one who gets things done, which Obama did not always do, however good his speechmaking. For example, JFK was succeeded by LBJ and Nixon, neither anything like as inspiring but both got things done, Hillary or Trump would certainly be closer to the latter than Obama's more JFK like persona. Equally Reagan was succeeded by the dull Bush Snr, who proved to be highly effective in foreign policy particularly

    IMO the problem is that neither Trump or Clinton seem to:
    a) have any idea of what needs doing.
    b) the strength to do it even if they had.

    America is spending too long saying 'we're great', whilst China and others see little more than weakness. The US needs to show it has great vision, and the power to do it.

    And that does not mean another war.
    Trump has threatened China with tariffs and will substantially increase the US military, Hillary is more pragmatic but probably one of the most experienced foreign policy candidates ever to have run for president and is certainly more of a hawk than Obama but with the diplomatic skills she gained as Secretary of State. Obama showed great vision, in foreign policy at least little action other than withdrawing ground troops from Iraq he has not achieved a great deal of what he set out to, JFK too produced the Bay of Pigs even if he avoided the Cuban Missile Crisis.
    They're perfect examples of what I'm talking about. Increasing the military: yawn (they're already massively the largest). Tariffs: yawn.

    Neither show America to be a world leader, even in the unlikely event that their actions reflect their words. Neither inspire.

    Neither will make the world pause and say: "Wow!"

    Kennedy and LBJ got man onto the moon, showing that the US could achieve the (near) impossible.
    Reagan defeated Russia and ended the Cold War without actually fighting.
    It was actually Nixon's presidency which saw a man on the moon. Reagan did the talking but the Cold War ended under Bush Snr
  • Chris said:

    If the notification had been revoked then the exit 2 years after notification wouldn't happen as there would be no notification.

    Oh, sure - all you need for that argument to work is a time machine.
    I don't need a TARDIS to use the cooling off period on a Credit Agreement. Or for an employer who wants to keep me to allow me to withdraw my resignation if I've changed my mind. The question is whether those flexibilities exist in A50. They either do or they don't. But in either case time travel time is irrelevant.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    But UKIP did so well at the 2013 County Council elections in 2013 because they took place barely two months after their strong performance at the Eastleigh by election. Without that boost and consequent momentum they would have flopped. There is no reason to expect a similar boost for them next Feb/March to propel them to success in May.
    Who has just been elected UKIP leader today? Why the very same UKIP candidate in the Eastleigh by election in 2013! Brexit of course is publicity beyond anything that by election could have given too
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,755

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    lection of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    Dream On !!
    UKIP are presently polling at about the level they got in May 2013, Labour often below the level they got last May, now UKIP have a new telegenic leader and Labour is about to re-elect Corbyn and with Brexit dominating the news next year I am certainly more than dreaming!
    On current results, UKIP will do very well in Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Lincolnshire, the South Coast, but fall back elsewhere. But, who knows where we'll be in May.
    Lincs ? 16 councillors elected in 2013 down to 12 now will lose 3 more due to boundary changes down to around 5 next May
    West Sussex 10 elected in 2013 down to 9 now will lose 1 more due to boundary changes will be down to 4 next May
    Hants 10 elected 2013 down to 8 now will be down to 1 or 2 at best next May
    UKIP do well in Eastern England. You may not like it, but there it is.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,120
    edited September 2016
    MaxPB said:

    tyson said:

    @Maxpb- Italy hosts two of the better European leaders...Renzi, and of course Francis...

    And it was Renzi who just called the EU a bunch of shitheads, possibly referendum posturing, but given the state of Italy's banks, probably the truth.
    I agree...Italy has been shafted much more by the EU than the UK.......a good point, and very well made.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,158
    Pint-sized champagne, blue passports, and HMY Britannia back on the seas. Brexit keeps getting better and better... :p

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/16/bring-back-britannia-to-rule-the-waves-after-brexit/
  • MaxPB said:

    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
    What's wrong with disliking them all, Trump. Putin and the EU. I loathe all of them.
    Not all Brexiteers love Trump, Putin.
    But all Trump, Putin lovers are Brexiteers.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    But UKIP did so well at the 2013 County Council elections in 2013 because they took place barely two months after their strong performance at the Eastleigh by election. Without that boost and consequent momentum they would have flopped. There is no reason to expect a similar boost for them next Feb/March to propel them to success in May.
    Who has just been elected UKIP leader today? Why the very same UKIP candidate in the Eastleigh by election in 2013! Brexit of course is publicity beyond anything that by election could have given too
    Neither here nor there. She was a good candidate for Eastleigh at that particular time , but when it comes to informed comment on elections etc she has often come across on results programmes as not really having much idea - pretty well ignorant when it comes to psephology. That said, she might have some appeal to Tory voters.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most grammars also have an entry at 13 and 16

    At 16, yes, for the sixth form, and that's two-way traffic, with some leaving to do A-levels or other things elsewhere. I've not heard of entry at 13 though, at least not here in Birmingham.
    In Bucks there is certainly entry at 13+ though often administered by schools themselves
    http://www.rgshw.com/1861/admissions/application-for-late-entrance-sept-2017
    From that site:

    "Please note that the testing does not imply that there are spaces but allows us to establish a waiting list of suitable boys should a place become available."

    That gives the impression that entry after 13 is only possible if places are freed up by other kids leaving, rather than being a normal means of entry.
    Well obviously if we had more new grammar schools there would be more places available for those who passed the 13 plus wouldn't there!
    Only if they operated differently to current grammar schools and reserved more places for older children. Edit: or threw out some kids to make room for the new ones!
    As I said there could even be new grammars with entries only at 13 or 16
    Grammar schools with entry only at 16 already effectively exist - they're called 6th form colleges. Grammar schools with entry at 13 might work, but I can't see the comprehensives being too chuffed about losing their main role models halfway through their schooling!

    As others have already said, this emphasis on picking out and specially educating an elite group of students is completely the wrong approach. If we are to have different types of school, then the non-grammar schools need to be seen as providing an equally viable technical education for the less academic, not just as a place to dump the losers who failed to get to grammar school.
    Nothing wrong with 6th form colleges but they are not selective in the same way as grammar schools and while some are very good academically some are little to write home about. If local parents want 13 entry grammars they can have them, regardless of what comprehensives may think. There of course is nothing wrong with having academies, free schools, faith schools, technical schools in the non-grammars either and hopefully the government will take those forward too
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,334

    MaxPB said:

    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
    What's wrong with disliking them all, Trump. Putin and the EU. I loathe all of them.
    Not all Brexiteers love Trump, Putin.
    But all Trump, Putin lovers are Brexiteers.
    Actually we have one hardcore Remainer in this thread who is a Trump supporter.
  • MaxPB said:

    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
    What's wrong with disliking them all, Trump. Putin and the EU. I loathe all of them.
    Not all Brexiteers love Trump, Putin.
    But all Trump, Putin lovers are Brexiteers.
    I'm broadly pro-Trump and not rabidly anti-Putin and I'm very pro-Remain.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited September 2016

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    Most grammars also have an entry at 13 and 16

    At 16, yes, for the sixth form, and that's two-way traffic, with some leaving to do A-levels or other things elsewhere. I've not heard of entry at 13 though, at least not here in Birmingham.
    In Bucks there is certainly entry at 13+ though often administered by schools themselves
    http://www.rgshw.com/1861/admissions/application-for-late-entrance-sept-2017
    From that site:

    "Please note that the testing does not imply that there are spaces but allows us to establish a waiting list of suitable boys should a place become available."

    That gives the impression that entry after 13 is only possible if places are freed up by other kids leaving, rather than being a normal means of entry.
    Well obviously if we had more new grammar schools there would be more places available for those who passed the 13 plus wouldn't there!
    Only if they operated differently to current grammar schools and reserved more places for older children. Edit: or threw out some kids to make room for the new ones!
    As I said there could even be new grammars with entries only at 13 or 16
    Grammar schools with entry only at 16 already effectively exist - they're called 6th form colleges. Grammar schools with entry at 13 might work, but I can't see the comprehensives being too chuffed about losing their main role models halfway through their schooling!

    As others have already said, this emphasis on picking out and specially educating an elite group of students is completely the wrong approach. If we are to have different types of school, then the non-grammar schools need to be seen as providing an equally viable technical education for the less academic, not just as a place to dump the losers who failed to get to grammar school.
    Why is giving opportunities to bright children from poor backgrounds the "wrong approach"? I think it ought to be the number one priority of the education system.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,334
    tyson said:

    MaxPB said:

    tyson said:

    @Maxpb- Italy hosts two of the better European leaders...Renzi, and of course Francis...

    And it was Renzi who just called the EU a bunch of shitheads, possibly referendum posturing, but given the state of Italy's banks, probably the truth.
    I agree...Italy has been shafted much more by the EU than the UK.......a good point, and very well made.
    Yes, and we've voted to leave, if the EU doesn't change its attitude Italy will continue walking towards the same exit door.
  • RobD said:

    Pint-sized champagne, blue passports, and HMY Britannia back on the seas. Brexit keeps getting better and better... :p

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/16/bring-back-britannia-to-rule-the-waves-after-brexit/

    As nautical Viagra to treat post imperial ererctile dysfunction goes it's a hell of a lot cheaper than Trident. Perhaps Corbyn will support it's building to create jobs as long as it never leaves port ?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,783


    I don't need a TARDIS to use the cooling off period on a Credit Agreement. Or for an employer who wants to keep me to allow me to withdraw my resignation if I've changed my mind. The question is whether those flexibilities exist in A50. They either do or they don't. But in either case time travel time is irrelevant.

    Obviously, the point is that Article 50 stipulates automatic exit two years after notification.

    That means that whatever is done after notification makes no difference, because notification has already happened - unless you can go back in time and change history.

    The only member state that could successfully revoke its notification would be Gallifrey!
  • glwglw Posts: 10,018
    weejonnie said:

    I think you'll find in a recent speech that Trump says "I don't like him, I don't dislike him, I don't know him". But of course never let facts get in the way of prejudice.

    In response to criticism about his repeated fawning over Putin.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    edited September 2016
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Council by elections rarely predict full council results exactly and of course next May's elections are only in County Councils unlike this month's council by elections, virtually no metropolitan councils and no London councils (where Corbyn would do best) will be up for election and this month's results also preceded the election of James today and by next May Corbyn will have been re-elected and Article 50 probably have been triggered with Brexit again at the top of the agenda!
    But UKIP did so well at the 2013 County Council elections i.
    Who has just been elected UKIP leader today? Why the very same UKIP candidate in the Eastleigh by election in 2013! Brexit of course is publicity beyond anything that by election could have given too
    Neither here nor there. She was a good candidate for Eastleigh at that particular time , but when it comes to informed comment on elections etc she has often come across on results programmes as not really having much idea - pretty well ignorant when it comes to psephology. That said, she might have some appeal to Tory voters.
    Absolutely here and there when Labour is about to re-elect its worst leader since Michael Foot, UKIP have a telegenic, state educated, sharp woman as their new leader. Her tough message on immigration and support for ending free movement and a points based system will not just appeal to some Tory voters, it will potentially offer an opportunity for UKIP to make yet further inroads into the white working class Labour vote fed up with Corbyn's open borders approach, especially the 30% of Labour voters who voted Leave
  • MaxPB said:

    tyson said:

    @GardenWalker........sorry with a capital S and Y at the end.
    I'm so used to coming here and seeing the site populated by right wingers who glorify in the nihilism of the moronic, lowest common denominator, nihilistic right ideology.

    Indeed.
    The same folks who in one breath complain about the controlling tendencies of the EU, seem to want to cosy up to Putin.

    True nihilism.
    What's wrong with disliking them all, Trump. Putin and the EU. I loathe all of them.
    Not all Brexiteers love Trump, Putin.
    But all Trump, Putin lovers are Brexiteers.
    I'm broadly pro-Trump and not rabidly anti-Putin and I'm very pro-Remain.
    I presume you are one those rounding errors you see in political polls,

    Ukippers for Corbyn,
    Greens for Farage --- etc
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,292
    A few days ago, I saw Gary Johnson at 600+ to 1 mentioned. I thought this looked quite good value, given the circumstances, and have monitored it for a few days. Suddenly he's at 3800 to 1. Has anything terrible happened to him? I know he's a third party candidate, but surely just being on the ballot in 50 states should place him higher than most bar the 2 front runners. Has he done something daft?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @TimHarford: "The Tories are going to be in for the rest of my life” @PickardJE and @henrymance on the future for Labour: https://t.co/UBGIJSYvSa in @FT
  • The end of a weird day. I still can't quite believe the British PM isn't at the EU summit. It's not just the EU. The British PM absent from a premier and highly relavent multinational forum which effects UK interests. And absent entirely by choice. It's so profoundly unBritish and a betrayal of our recent history. It just feels really weird though perhaps I'll get used to it. Though hopefully not too quickly. Something's are worth mourning. We'll just have to hope the miracle that is modern Germany is upto the destiny we've inexplicably manifested for them. Good Night PB !
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,716
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    Perhaps we need to await confirmation from a few more polls but there seems to be some evidence that May's honeymoon is fading and the Tory lead falling back to more modest levels. I had always expected this by early Autumn and will not be too surprised if we see some neck and neck polls by Xmas.

    I would not be surprised to see UKIP edging close to Labour by this time next year with Corbyn re-elected and James UKIP leader. I also think there is as strong chance UKIP beat Labour in the Witney by-election and the County elections next May
    Very unlikely in my opinion.
    UKIP were just 2% behind Labour in the 2013 County elections and 8% behind Labour in Witney at the general election
    UKIP are now 10% behind Labour in all council by elections held in September
    Quite correct , having looked at all the CC up next May and the few unitaries I expect UKIP to lose around 105 of the 147 seats they are theoretically defending . They have already lost around 30 to by election losses and defections .
    Rubbish, by next May, with Brexit in full swing and hard Brexiteers seeking to put pressure on the PM and with James a far more appealing leader than Corbyn I could well see UKIP getting around 25% of the vote in the County councils up for election
    I really feel you are seriously overestimating the salience of the EU /Brexit as an electoral issue. Most people feel they have voted and made a decision - and wish to move on. Few people will remain so fixated on it.
    Really? EU ref had the highest turnout of any election since 1992 and Brexit has not even been triggered yet, it will dominate politics until the general election
    The high turnout owed much to the fact that the campaign had gone on for so long and to some extent reflected the desire to be done with the issue. There is very little polling evidence to suggest it is a particularly salient issue per se at a General Election, and I believe that increasingly people will come to see it as a dead issue - unless May really went back on Brexit .
    The high turnout reflected in large part a white working class fed up with what they felt to be too much immigration. Immigration was the number one issue in August in the polls
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,158

    The end of a weird day. I still can't quite believe the British PM isn't at the EU summit. It's not just the EU. The British PM absent from a premier and highly relavent multinational forum which effects UK interests. And absent entirely by choice. It's so profoundly unBritish and a betrayal of our recent history. It just feels really weird though perhaps I'll get used to it. Though hopefully not too quickly. Something's are worth mourning. We'll just have to hope the miracle that is modern Germany is upto the destiny we've inexplicably manifested for them. Good Night PB !

    There are many multinational forums we aren't invited to.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,769

    The end of a weird day. I still can't quite believe the British PM isn't at the EU summit. It's not just the EU. The British PM absent from a premier and highly relavent multinational forum which effects UK interests. And absent entirely by choice. It's so profoundly unBritish and a betrayal of our recent history. It just feels really weird though perhaps I'll get used to it. Though hopefully not too quickly. Something's are worth mourning. We'll just have to hope the miracle that is modern Germany is upto the destiny we've inexplicably manifested for them. Good Night PB !

    These are bad times. It will get worse before it gets better.
  • Cookie said:

    A few days ago, I saw Gary Johnson at 600+ to 1 mentioned. I thought this looked quite good value, given the circumstances, and have monitored it for a few days. Suddenly he's at 3800 to 1. Has anything terrible happened to him? I know he's a third party candidate, but surely just being on the ballot in 50 states should place him higher than most bar the 2 front runners. Has he done something daft?

    " What is Aleppo ? " And today the Debates Commission confirmed his exclusion from the first debate.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,591
    Cookie said:

    A few days ago, I saw Gary Johnson at 600+ to 1 mentioned. I thought this looked quite good value, given the circumstances, and have monitored it for a few days. Suddenly he's at 3800 to 1. Has anything terrible happened to him? I know he's a third party candidate, but surely just being on the ballot in 50 states should place him higher than most bar the 2 front runners. Has he done something daft?

    A week ago, the chance of Hillary withdrawing was being seriously talked up. Now the market thinks it's unlikely this will happen, so there's no longer the huge underround there was a week ago on the two favourites. That said, I might have a quid on Johnson at 3800, just in case.
  • nunununu Posts: 6,024

    I've always opposed Heathrow expansion but frankly post Brexit it makes sense. If your open, outward looking and reading nation accidentally does something as stupid as Brexit you need to take corrective action quickly. For all it's short comings Heathrow expansion is without doubt ( a) something ( b) an expansive, opening, internationalist and globalising move. ( c) a response to Brexit that doesn't reward a certain sort of Brexiteers. To over simplify Heathrow reinforces London and the South East's preeminence in the UK economy. The worst thing we could do is poor unproductive capital into some town that's just blamed all it's problems on Foreigners. The sooner we Leave voters realise they've voted for a different flavour of globalisation not to stop globalisation the better. I know see Heathrow expansion as a form of political and economic air bag. Something you hope you'd never use but if you've crashed the car essential to use. If May needs to delay a decision for a few weeks to achieve closure on a decision that's already been delayed decades then so be it.

    Heathrow's largest shareholder is Spanish. Why give them a free pass in a post-Brexit world?

    Find a British owned airport and let them expand.
    Hear hear, let's start with the Durham-tees valley one and re name it Sports Direct airport.
  • glw said:

    He wont be a dictator though. Enough crap presidents and Congress might insist on appointing an experienced member of the house of representative to advise him......

    I agree that Trump will find that his powers in practice are limited, but that's not a reason to vote for him. Essentially saying "don't worry Congress will muzzle him" acknowledges that left to his own devices he'd be rubbish or worse.
    Supporting Trump with the claim that he doesn't mean what he says, or won't be able to do what he says - is the height of recklessness and stupidity.

    He has baited the media, successfully, with a campaign of racist, misogynist grotesquerie.

    Surprised the amount of folks on here with latent fascist tendencies.
    I'm surprised you're surprised.
This discussion has been closed.