Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A new settlement for Europe?

SystemSystem Posts: 11,710
edited September 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A new settlement for Europe?

It was said of the Thane of Cawdor that “Nothing in his life became him like the leaving it.”  Well Britain may not be an ambitious murderer driven to evil deeds by superstitious prophecies (though some on the Remain side or in Continental Europe might well think otherwise).  And it has not left anything yet.  But two months on from the referendum, the swift defenestration of one ruler, his replac…

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015
    cheeky first!
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015
    Thanks for the thread, it was an interesting read!
  • Options
    It's a beautiful thread header. If it's poetry then Brirain's actual relationship with Europe over 43 years has been in prose version. Negotiated semi detachment while doing quite a bit of heavy lifting. Now that the arsonists have set fire to building hoping for a Pheonix seems a trifle optermistc.
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    People became cynical when the " political union" was part hidden intentionally on occasions. Those that led this EU government were effectively unelected and could not be removed at ballot boxes. They held sway over a large number of people and could criticise and condemn safe in the knowledge they could not be removed certainly be the voters. That and newspapers constantly reporting on European decisions as what Merkel wants or the French want that carries the day creates perceptions that are unhelpful and just sowed further confusion.

    Why does a single trade block need its own flag, national anthem , army , courts system, passport system and parliament (x 2 in different locations) and common currency? Even meddling down to the small items by insisting we place a blue flag and yellow stars on our number plates? (Ok you can have GB sticker for the pedantic.)If they had just been honest and just said we are aiming for the United States of Europe which is effectively what we have they may have done better in selling the brand

    The EU has created the conditions for the present situation and being up front at the start may well have led to a different outcome. They still don't get it though even now.
  • Options
    Morning all.

    Cheers Ms Cyclefree, how things have changed in the last 43 years, from a common market I could happily live with, to a federal state I could not. - So long, and thanks for all the fish.
  • Options
    Yes, we'll keep on telling 27 other nations what's good for them until they bloody well start listening to us. And if they don't we'll bloody well go and shack up with some other sub-continent who appreciates us and buys us flowers now and again.
  • Options
    Al Jazeera English: 'Massive crisis' as 1.5 million expected to flee Mosul. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwtP6c9TE
  • Options
    The National: East Aleppo catastrophe is unprecedented in Syrian war, says UN aid chief. http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwuoL5oS4
  • Options
    MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Thanks for the header, Cyclefree.

    The EU and UK have so many common interests, both current and future, that your approach should be seen as the obvious one. My worry is two-fold:
    - this is, as you state, a bit Gaullist for the UK, which with its pragmatic approach to policy-making tends to be very reactive, rather than philosophical, and so is not really the UK's style
    - the EU seems so hell bent on making Brexit sufficiently uncomfortable that I fear it will blind them to the attractions and commonsense of your approach.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/
  • Options
    TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
  • Options
    Interesting thread Cyclefree - tho I wonder if a party Conference is the place to set out such a vision? Normally it would be an Election Manifesto, failing that a queen's Speech. Conference speeches are about rallying the troops, so I suspect we'll get 'steady as she goes, don't scare the horses while we do our best for Britain'.

    Of course if the Deutsch Bank drama continues unfolding, in ways not necessarily to the advantage of the German government or ecoomy, it could be 'a whole different ball game':

    Hedge funds have started to pull some of their business from Deutsche Bank, setting up a potential showdown with German authorities over the future of the country’s largest lender.

    https://www.ft.com/content/42ec5f88-8620-11e6-a29c-6e7d9515ad15
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    edited September 2016
    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    Quite so, although the modern significance of dead tree picks is of more limited value in the world of social media. However you'd rather have them than not and provides a modest fillip in the news cycle.
  • Options
    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    Brutal - but not unequivocal support for Clinton either:

    Nor does this editorial represent unqualified support for Hillary Clinton, who has her own flaws (though hers are far less likely to threaten national security or lead to a constitutional crisis). The Editorial Board does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement.

    Some of us look at her command of the issues, resilience and long record of public service — as first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of State — and believe she’d serve the nation ably as its president.

    Other board members have serious reservations about Clinton’s sense of entitlement, her lack of candor and her extreme carelessness in handling classified information.


    But overall, I'd say pretty fair.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Brutal - but not unequivocal support for Clinton either:

    Nor does this editorial represent unqualified support for Hillary Clinton, who has her own flaws (though hers are far less likely to threaten national security or lead to a constitutional crisis). The Editorial Board does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement.

    Some of us look at her command of the issues, resilience and long record of public service — as first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of State — and believe she’d serve the nation ably as its president.

    Other board members have serious reservations about Clinton’s sense of entitlement, her lack of candor and her extreme carelessness in handling classified information.


    But overall, I'd say pretty fair.

    Essentially Clinton the pick as Trump is so dire.

    The Clinton endorsement from the "Arizona Republic" is noteworthy. First Dem they have picked. Again the driver is Trump's awful candidacy rather than huge enthusiasm for Clinton, which indeed nationwide will be the factor that puts her in the White House.

  • Options
    2 Lib Dem gains from Tories

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Stow (Cotswold) result:
    LDEM: 64.9% (+21.0)
    CON: 35.1% (-21.0)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Stow (Cotswold) from Conservative.

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Adeyfield West (Dacorum) result:
    LDEM: 49.5% (+24.4)
    CON: 22.2% (-4.6)
    LAB: 15.8% (-8.7)
    UKIP: 10.9% (-12.7)
    GRN: 1.6% (+1.6)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Adeyfield West (Dacorum) from Conservative.

    Elsewhere LibDem, Tory and Labour holds.
  • Options
    Excellent thread Cyclefree.

    This is one of the principle reasons I voted Leave, and how I convinced my (Bulgarian) wife to also vote Leave: for the UK to lead an alternative model for Europe.

    That might not happen in the next 2-4 years, and a new European settlement can only mature and develop once we have left, but we will remain the 2nd largest economy in Europe and its joint largest military power.

    That gives us influence and the opportunity to be an alternative epicentre for European leadership. Once we have left, there will be little the EU can do about it.
  • Options

    It's a beautiful thread header. If it's poetry then Brirain's actual relationship with Europe over 43 years has been in prose version. Negotiated semi detachment while doing quite a bit of heavy lifting. Now that the arsonists have set fire to building hoping for a Pheonix seems a trifle optermistc.

    I may come up with a new medical term: Brexichosis.

    Brexichosis: the psychosis-like changing of a previously respected, and level-headed, poster in response to the Brexit vote into a hyperbolic obsessive, who sees armageddon in every story, because their thoughts and emotions have become so impaired contact has been lost with reality.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    I may come up with a new medical term: Brexichosis.

    Brexichosis: the psychosis-like changing of a previously respected, and level-headed, poster in response to the Brexit vote into a hyperbolic obsessive, who sees armageddon in every story, because their thoughts and emotions have become so impaired contact has been lost with reality.

    c.f. Brexiphilia

    A degenerative brain disease that leaves the unfortunate sufferer with the same cognitive abilities as Liam Fox...
  • Options

    It's a beautiful thread header. If it's poetry then Brirain's actual relationship with Europe over 43 years has been in prose version. Negotiated semi detachment while doing quite a bit of heavy lifting. Now that the arsonists have set fire to building hoping for a Pheonix seems a trifle optermistc.

    I may come up with a new medical term: Brexichosis.

    Brexichosis: the psychosis-like changing of a previously respected, and level-headed, poster in response to the Brexit vote into a hyperbolic obsessive, who sees armageddon in every story, because their thoughts and emotions have become so impaired contact has been lost with reality.
    You mean you don't agree agree with me.
  • Options
    Fantastic header. But sadly agree with the conclusion that Britain has no real history of grand strategy.

    I see there is still some abuse of Remainerhood on this thread.

    One would thought that Brexiters, having won the referendum, would have moved on to impassioned discussion of the opportunities ahead of us as the Singapore of the North Atlantic.

    That they prefer to yah boo perhaps indicates a fear, rather than excitement, about what happens next.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,085

    2 Lib Dem gains from Tories

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Stow (Cotswold) result:
    LDEM: 64.9% (+21.0)
    CON: 35.1% (-21.0)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Stow (Cotswold) from Conservative.

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Adeyfield West (Dacorum) result:
    LDEM: 49.5% (+24.4)
    CON: 22.2% (-4.6)
    LAB: 15.8% (-8.7)
    UKIP: 10.9% (-12.7)
    GRN: 1.6% (+1.6)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Adeyfield West (Dacorum) from Conservative.

    Elsewhere LibDem, Tory and Labour holds.

    Some cheer for the LD’s. As someone pointed out yesterday, Cotswold is the next DC to the one in which Witney is situated.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Fantastic header. But sadly agree with the conclusion that Britain has no real history of grand strategy.

    I see there is still some abuse of Remainerhood on this thread.

    One would thought that Brexiters, having won the referendum, would have moved on to impassioned discussion of the opportunities ahead of us as the Singapore of the North Atlantic.

    That they prefer to yah boo perhaps indicates a fear, rather than excitement, about what happens next.

    Nah. Brexiteers haven't even got a coherent vision for Britain, let alone Europe.

    Britain has no vision for Europe. It had one at one point when Maggie whipped through the single market reforms, before her regret in doing so.

    It will be a messy divorce, with both parties seeing themselves as the injured party. No one listens to their ex for advice, and rightly so as it is always self serving.

    We have made our bed and now have to lie in it. No sympathy shags are likely.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,514
    Nice thread header and an on-the-money article. Now who was it on here yesterday that said we were done win discussing Brexit!
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Nah. Brexiteers haven't even got a coherent vision for Britain, let alone Europe.

    Britain has no vision for Europe. It had one at one point when Maggie whipped through the single market reforms, before her regret in doing so.

    Faisal Islam posted some information last night from the Thatcher archives about her encouraging Nissan to invest in the UK based on our membership of the single market.

    And the Brexiteers on Twitter went mental
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,417
    edited September 2016
    "We could treat this like a divorce: a protracted, intermittently painful, detailed haggling over who gets what and on what terms, until bored and exhausted by the hand to hand fighting, we retire from the scene, bruised and trying hard to convince ourselves that all things considered the settlement hasn’t been too bad. Meanwhile the bewildered children look on, wondering what the hell is going on"

    Just loved that paragraph. An excellent thread header.

    What we need to be clear about is that we have a wide range of common interests with the EU where we want to continue working together closely and in co-operation. I have mentioned some of these before but they include security, patents, the European arrest warrant, mutual enforcement of decrees, tax policies, environmental concerns and a wide range of common standards. We need to be clear that we will positively engage with the EU on all of these issues, that we want tariff free trade for our mutual benefit. I almost put a but in there but there really should be no "buts" on any of that.

    If those in Brussels had ever believed in subsidiarity I think we might have stayed. But they didn't. They believed in a nation state of Europe with ever more trappings of a State and common decision making. Fair enough. If the peoples of Europe really want that good luck to them. I suspect we will find that we were not alone in having reservations about it but that is their decision. And we made ours. But we can and should still be friends, possibly even friends with benefits.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Scott_P said:
    That cant be right, MaxPB was on here yesterday saying BREXIT cost us virtually nothing...
  • Options
    Scott_P said:
    Which shows the folly of Carney lowering interest rates to try to mitigate the armaggedon that never was.
  • Options

    It's a beautiful thread header. If it's poetry then Brirain's actual relationship with Europe over 43 years has been in prose version. Negotiated semi detachment while doing quite a bit of heavy lifting. Now that the arsonists have set fire to building hoping for a Pheonix seems a trifle optermistc.

    I may come up with a new medical term: Brexichosis.

    Brexichosis: the psychosis-like changing of a previously respected, and level-headed, poster in response to the Brexit vote into a hyperbolic obsessive, who sees armageddon in every story, because their thoughts and emotions have become so impaired contact has been lost with reality.
    You mean you don't agree agree with me.
    No, you have been posting ludicrous hyperbole over recent weeks on here virtually non-stop.

    You are starting to look obsessive and unhinged, and it's not just me who's noticed.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:
    Following story:

    British consumer morale rocketed back to pre-Brexit levels in September, a survey found, confounding expectations that the vote to leave the EU would wreak more lasting damage on Briton's willingness to spend.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-consumersentiment-idUKKCN11Z341

    (Original Reuters/non £££)

  • Options
    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    People became cynical when the " political union" was part hidden intentionally on occasions. Those that led this EU government were effectively unelected and could not be removed at ballot boxes. They held sway over a large number of people and could criticise and condemn safe in the knowledge they could not be removed certainly be the voters. That and newspapers constantly reporting on European decisions as what Merkel wants or the French want that carries the day creates perceptions that are unhelpful and just sowed further confusion.

    Why does a single trade block need its own flag, national anthem , army , courts system, passport system and parliament (x 2 in different locations) and common currency? Even meddling down to the small items by insisting we place a blue flag and yellow stars on our number plates? (Ok you can have GB sticker for the pedantic.)If they had just been honest and just said we are aiming for the United States of Europe which is effectively what we have they may have done better in selling the brand

    The EU has created the conditions for the present situation and being up front at the start may well have led to a different outcome. They still don't get it though even now.

    The whole EU strategy was the boiling frog strategy. Change very gradually while lying about the gas being on at a very low level under pot in the hope that by the time everyone realised it would be too late.

    The courage and indefagitability of the British people have just blown that strategy out of the water.
  • Options
    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    It doesn't need to reach people who think Obama is a foreign born Muslim ( incidentally that figure has fallen since Trump recanted) it needs to reach undecideds.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015

    2 Lib Dem gains from Tories

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Stow (Cotswold) result:
    LDEM: 64.9% (+21.0)
    CON: 35.1% (-21.0)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Stow (Cotswold) from Conservative.

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Adeyfield West (Dacorum) result:
    LDEM: 49.5% (+24.4)
    CON: 22.2% (-4.6)
    LAB: 15.8% (-8.7)
    UKIP: 10.9% (-12.7)
    GRN: 1.6% (+1.6)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Adeyfield West (Dacorum) from Conservative.

    Elsewhere LibDem, Tory and Labour holds.

    Some cheer for the LD’s. As someone pointed out yesterday, Cotswold is the next DC to the one in which Witney is situated.
    I'm worried what's going to happen to some posters when the LDs actually win a parliamentary seat... :D
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956
    Morning. Another excellent article from Ms @Cyclefree, obviously it's too much to ask to have her on the British negotiating team but hope some of those who will be involved are reading it.

    One point of information, the referendum was now over three months ago, not two as stated in the first paragraph - unless this has been in OGH's inbox for a while!
  • Options
    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    And will just encourage those who want to take a wrecking ball to the establishment to vote for him
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    Nah. Brexiteers haven't even got a coherent vision for Britain, let alone Europe.

    Britain has no vision for Europe. It had one at one point when Maggie whipped through the single market reforms, before her regret in doing so.

    Faisal Islam posted some information last night from the Thatcher archives about her encouraging Nissan to invest in the UK based on our membership of the single market.

    And the Brexiteers on Twitter went mental
    Islam is to Remain what Neil is to Leave.

    What I found particularly interesting about the Nissan story isn't that they said they'd up sticks and leave if there was a hard Brexit, because they didn't, it was that they expected the UK Government to compensate in other ways.

    That could include corporation tax cuts, or more flexible employment law, some deregulation or investment incentives.

    As always, there are both costs and benefits to leaving the EU.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    As a concise summary of why Trump is unfit to be President it works well. Perhaps best summed up with his plan to replace Obamacare with "something terrific". Well who could fault that? Health care sorted in two words.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    And will just encourage those who want to take a wrecking ball to the establishment to vote for him
    The Bakunin approach to politics

    "The urge to destroy is also a creative urge"
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    The Trump fans will see just that, the whole Establishment closing ranks behind someone they consider unsuitable and the better of two evils. It's very like the British Establishment did with the EU vote, was it the Times or the FT that listed all the things wrong with the EU then said vote Remain anyway?

    The key now isn't the supporters though, they're going to vote for him anyway - it's the floating voters in the swing states.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,445
    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    People became cynical when the " political union" was part hidden intentionally on occasions. Those that led this EU government were effectively unelected and could not be removed at ballot boxes. They held sway over a large number of people and could criticise and condemn safe in the knowledge they could not be removed certainly be the voters. That and newspapers constantly reporting on European decisions as what Merkel wants or the French want that carries the day creates perceptions that are unhelpful and just sowed further confusion.

    Why does a single trade block need its own flag, national anthem , army , courts system, passport system and parliament (x 2 in different locations) and common currency? Even meddling down to the small items by insisting we place a blue flag and yellow stars on our number plates? (Ok you can have GB sticker for the pedantic.)If they had just been honest and just said we are aiming for the United States of Europe which is effectively what we have they may have done better in selling the brand

    The EU has created the conditions for the present situation and being up front at the start may well have led to a different outcome. They still don't get it though even now.

    There was never a doubt that ever closer union has been at the heart of the EU for years. And endorsed by us (by our democratically-elected governments, Maastricht, Lisbon).

    And hence the importance in Dave's "crap deal" of our specific opt out of...ever closer union. Under that banner we could have opted out of any number of initiatives over and above those we would regardless have rejected (EU army, etc). And if we thought we were still getting bulldozed we could have elected a party to ensure we bloody well did opt out of them.

    Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

    But Dave's doc is arguably one of the most misunderstood pieces of negotation we have seen. Immigration aside, where it was an abject failure.
  • Options
    Scott_P said:

    I may come up with a new medical term: Brexichosis.

    Brexichosis: the psychosis-like changing of a previously respected, and level-headed, poster in response to the Brexit vote into a hyperbolic obsessive, who sees armageddon in every story, because their thoughts and emotions have become so impaired contact has been lost with reality.

    c.f. Brexiphilia

    A degenerative brain disease that leaves the unfortunate sufferer with the same cognitive abilities as Liam Fox...
    c.f. Brexiphobia

    An irrational fear of BREXIT stoked by naive acceptance of the more alarmist BREXIT prophesies (yes, George Osborne, I'm looking at you). Subsequent failure of these prophesies to happen can be brushed aside by continuously repeating 'But we haven't BREXITed yet - just you wait! You'll see then! I was right all along' in response to each new piece of evidence which contradicts the word of Osborne.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,233
    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    People became cynical when the " political union" was part hidden intentionally on occasions. Those that led this EU government were effectively unelected and could not be removed at ballot boxes. They held sway over a large number of people and could criticise and condemn safe in the knowledge they could not be removed certainly be the voters. That and newspapers constantly reporting on European decisions as what Merkel wants or the French want that carries the day creates perceptions that are unhelpful and just sowed further confusion.

    Why does a single trade block need its own flag, national anthem , army , courts system, passport system and parliament (x 2 in different locations) and common currency? Even meddling down to the small items by insisting we place a blue flag and yellow stars on our number plates? (Ok you can have GB sticker for the pedantic.)If they had just been honest and just said we are aiming for the United States of Europe which is effectively what we have they may have done better in selling the brand

    The EU has created the conditions for the present situation and being up front at the start may well have led to a different outcome. They still don't get it though even now.

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,445
    edited September 2016
    On topic

    A very elegant thread, @Cyclefree, as ever, but sadly illustrates that none of us, not even your enlightened self are anywhere beyond a "something must be done" position.

    We must all be grown up...new settlement..let's be sensible..

    Fine, but all this starts from our red line on immigration and the possible EU response. The rest is details.

    Or to use your analogy of a divorce, like one party saying I want the children, now let's talk sensibly about the sandwich-maker.
  • Options
    DavidL said:

    "We could treat this like a divorce: a protracted, intermittently painful, detailed haggling over who gets what and on what terms, until bored and exhausted by the hand to hand fighting, we retire from the scene, bruised and trying hard to convince ourselves that all things considered the settlement hasn’t been too bad. Meanwhile the bewildered children look on, wondering what the hell is going on"

    Just loved that paragraph. An excellent thread header.

    What we need to be clear about is that we have a wide range of common interests with the EU where we want to continue working together closely and in co-operation. I have mentioned some of these before but they include security, patents, the European arrest warrant, mutual enforcement of decrees, tax policies, environmental concerns and a wide range of common standards. We need to be clear that we will positively engage with the EU on all of these issues, that we want tariff free trade for our mutual benefit. I almost put a but in there but there really should be no "buts" on any of that.

    If those in Brussels had ever believed in subsidiarity I think we might have stayed. But they didn't. They believed in a nation state of Europe with ever more trappings of a State and common decision making. Fair enough. If the peoples of Europe really want that good luck to them. I suspect we will find that we were not alone in having reservations about it but that is their decision. And we made ours. But we can and should still be friends, possibly even friends with benefits.

    Keep the European Arrest Warrant allowing the corrupt parajudiciaries of eastern and southern European banana republics to continue to abduct British Citizens for suposed offences that are not even illegal in this country? No thanks.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956
    F1 - two Mercedes cars are miles ahead of the field. Hamilton is 1.9 on Betfair and Rosberg 3 to win the race, as a double that's looking like a great bet, can't see past a processional 1-2 on Sunday unless they crash into each other again.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cyclefree said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
    It would perhaps have been useful to have a think about what Brexit means for our role in Europe three months before rather than three months after voting to leave!

    The way forward is Hard Brexit. Unless we want to follow EU directives without even the slightest say in how they are written then we need to leave completely.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,514

    Scott_P said:
    Following story:

    British consumer morale rocketed back to pre-Brexit levels in September, a survey found, confounding expectations that the vote to leave the EU would wreak more lasting damage on Briton's willingness to spend.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-consumersentiment-idUKKCN11Z341

    (Original Reuters/non £££)

    Not really a story. People's consumer behaviour works on a short timescale. After a week or two if the world hasn't obviously collapsed, people go back to normal; no-one is going to act differently now for something that may change things in three or four years time,
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    The Trump fans will see just that, the whole Establishment closing ranks behind someone they consider unsuitable and the better of two evils. It's very like the British Establishment did with the EU vote, was it the Times or the FT that listed all the things wrong with the EU then said vote Remain anyway?

    The key now isn't the supporters though, they're going to vote for him anyway - it's the floating voters in the swing states.
    Sandpit said:

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    The Trump fans will see just that, the whole Establishment closing ranks behind someone they consider unsuitable and the better of two evils. It's very like the British Establishment did with the EU vote, was it the Times or the FT that listed all the things wrong with the EU then said vote Remain anyway?

    The key now isn't the supporters though, they're going to vote for him anyway - it's the floating voters in the swing states.
    Much as it was in Brexit - That said Clinton must be glad that it is Trump not Farage she is up against.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,445

    Scott_P said:

    Nah. Brexiteers haven't even got a coherent vision for Britain, let alone Europe.

    Britain has no vision for Europe. It had one at one point when Maggie whipped through the single market reforms, before her regret in doing so.

    Faisal Islam posted some information last night from the Thatcher archives about her encouraging Nissan to invest in the UK based on our membership of the single market.

    And the Brexiteers on Twitter went mental
    Islam is to Remain what Neil is to Leave.

    What I found particularly interesting about the Nissan story isn't that they said they'd up sticks and leave if there was a hard Brexit, because they didn't, it was that they expected the UK Government to compensate in other ways.

    That could include corporation tax cuts, or more flexible employment law, some deregulation or investment incentives.

    As always, there are both costs and benefits to leaving the EU.
    And making direct transfers from the UK taxpayer to foreign corporations, for them to stay in the UK, you will I hope agree is an unambiguous cost. As you say, no different from a low tax "enterprise zone", the type of which China has been so successful with.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,514
    RobD said:

    2 Lib Dem gains from Tories

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Stow (Cotswold) result:
    LDEM: 64.9% (+21.0)
    CON: 35.1% (-21.0)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Stow (Cotswold) from Conservative.

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Adeyfield West (Dacorum) result:
    LDEM: 49.5% (+24.4)
    CON: 22.2% (-4.6)
    LAB: 15.8% (-8.7)
    UKIP: 10.9% (-12.7)
    GRN: 1.6% (+1.6)

    Britain Elects ‏@britainelects 8h8 hours ago
    Liberal Democrat GAIN Adeyfield West (Dacorum) from Conservative.

    Elsewhere LibDem, Tory and Labour holds.

    Some cheer for the LD’s. As someone pointed out yesterday, Cotswold is the next DC to the one in which Witney is situated.
    I'm worried what's going to happen to some posters when the LDs actually win a parliamentary seat... :D
    Party!
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,233
    Sandpit said:

    Morning. Another excellent article from Ms @Cyclefree, obviously it's too much to ask to have her on the British negotiating team but hope some of those who will be involved are reading it.

    One point of information, the referendum was now over three months ago, not two as stated in the first paragraph - unless this has been in OGH's inbox for a while!

    Ah! That's my mistake. Sorry! It's working with all these traders wot does it. I've learnt their appalling way with numbers...... :)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015
    edited September 2016

    Scott_P said:
    Following story:

    British consumer morale rocketed back to pre-Brexit levels in September, a survey found, confounding expectations that the vote to leave the EU would wreak more lasting damage on Briton's willingness to spend.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-consumersentiment-idUKKCN11Z341

    (Original Reuters/non £££)

    Good news for VAT receipts if people are still buying despite an increase in cost ;)
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,079
    Surely we won't have to wait much longer for some detailed vision about what may hopes to get? Sure, the true aim may be hidden for negotiation, but the starting position will need to be stated for when a50 is triggered and by all accounts that seems to be set for early 2017.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956
    TOPPING said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.
    ...
    People became cynical when the " political union" was part hidden intentionally on occasions. Those that led this EU government were effectively unelected and could not be removed at ballot boxes. They held sway over a large number of people and could criticise and condemn safe in the knowledge they could not be removed certainly be the voters. That and newspapers constantly reporting on European decisions as what Merkel wants or the French want that carries the day creates perceptions that are unhelpful and just sowed further confusion.

    Why does a single trade block need its own flag, national anthem , army , courts system, passport system and parliament (x 2 in different locations) and common currency? Even meddling down to the small items by insisting we place a blue flag and yellow stars on our number plates? (Ok you can have GB sticker for the pedantic.)If they had just been honest and just said we are aiming for the United States of Europe which is effectively what we have they may have done better in selling the brand

    The EU has created the conditions for the present situation and being up front at the start may well have led to a different outcome. They still don't get it though even now.

    There was never a doubt that ever closer union has been at the heart of the EU for years. And endorsed by us (by our democratically-elected governments, Maastricht, Lisbon).

    And hence the importance in Dave's "crap deal" of our specific opt out of...ever closer union. Under that banner we could have opted out of any number of initiatives over and above those we would regardless have rejected (EU army, etc). And if we thought we were still getting bulldozed we could have elected a party to ensure we bloody well did opt out of them.

    Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

    But Dave's doc is arguably one of the most misunderstood pieces of negotation we have seen. Immigration aside, where it was an abject failure.
    The issue wasn't what the 'deal' said or didn't about such lofty concepts, but what it would mean in practice in terms of being binding on the EU, ability to opt out of things in the future.

    We all remember things like the working time directive being introduced as health and safety legislation rather than employment legislation, precisely to get around some countries' opt outs etc.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,079
    TOPPING said:



    Or to use your analogy of a divorce, like one party saying I want the children, now let's talk sensibly about the sandwich-maker.

    Love it
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015
    kle4 said:

    Surely we won't have to wait much longer for some detailed vision about what may hopes to get? Sure, the true aim may be hidden for negotiation, but the starting position will need to be stated for when a50 is triggered and by all accounts that seems to be set for early 2017.

    I'm hoping for something at the conference, but maybe that would be showing our hand a bit too early.
  • Options
    mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    It's all a conspiracy isn't it. I think it was PJ O'Rourke, no Democrat sympathiser, who's said of Clinton, she may be wrong on everything, but it's wrong within the bounds of normality.

    When people like PJoR are voting Democrat or considering not voting you really should put the conspiracy theories away.
  • Options
    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,233

    Cyclefree said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
    It would perhaps have been useful to have a think about what Brexit means for our role in Europe three months before rather than three months after voting to leave!

    Agreed. And I suggested as much on here. But we are where we are. There is time before Article 50 is triggered. Other leaders are waiting. We should be having that debate now.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.

    There were plenty of open-hearted and generous people who voted Leave who just didn't want to be ruled by Brussels.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.

    To paraphrase the Donald. "The EU will be replaced by something terrific".

    Will that do?

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.

    To paraphrase the Donald. "The EU will be replaced by something terrific".

    Will that do?

    On your earlier point: I'm pretty sure he said more than that, otherwise how would it be able to be torn apart so thoroughly:

    http://crfb.org/blogs/analysis-donald-trumps-health-care-plan
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956
    Cyclefree said:

    Sandpit said:

    Morning. Another excellent article from Ms @Cyclefree, obviously it's too much to ask to have her on the British negotiating team but hope some of those who will be involved are reading it.

    One point of information, the referendum was now over three months ago, not two as stated in the first paragraph - unless this has been in OGH's inbox for a while!

    Ah! That's my mistake. Sorry! It's working with all these traders wot does it. I've learnt their appalling way with numbers...... :)
    Ha ha, ;) Great article though, a well articulated summary of the decisions facing the government in the coming months.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,079

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.

    There were some open hearted and generous inthe 52, even if you think they were wrong.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015
    kle4 said:

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.

    There were some open hearted and generous inthe 52, even if you think they were wrong.
    Certainly doesn't describe those born with a heart of neutrality. :p
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
    It would perhaps have been useful to have a think about what Brexit means for our role in Europe three months before rather than three months after voting to leave!

    Agreed. And I suggested as much on here. But we are where we are. There is time before Article 50 is triggered. Other leaders are waiting. We should be having that debate now.
    I do not want a relationship with the EU where we have no MEPs, no representation on the council of ministers, no representation on the Commission, yet have to follow their rules. The only positions that make sense are fully in or fully out. Having voted out we need to stick to it, even if it means blood, sweat, toil and tears.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    Surely we won't have to wait much longer for some detailed vision about what may hopes to get? Sure, the true aim may be hidden for negotiation, but the starting position will need to be stated for when a50 is triggered and by all accounts that seems to be set for early 2017.

    I'm hoping for something at the conference, but maybe that would be showing our hand a bit too early.
    It would also set a precedent for policy debates at Conservative Party conferences.
  • Options
    Paul_BedfordshirePaul_Bedfordshire Posts: 3,632
    edited September 2016
    matt said:

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    It's all a conspiracy isn't it. I think it was PJ O'Rourke, no Democrat sympathiser, who's said of Clinton, she may be wrong on everything, but it's wrong within the bounds of normality.

    When people like PJoR are voting Democrat or considering not voting you really should put the conspiracy theories away.
    Few who are wealthy, notable or successful will vote Trump.

    The people who will vote Trump are ordinary people who have seen life get harder, wages fall, job insecurity rise, all the while being told they are racist crass luddites by the wealthy liberal 1% who have taken an ever bigger share of the pie.

    Liberals are so consumed with hatred of Trump that they are blind to why someone like Trump has got into the position that he is in.

    Trump may win, he may not, if he dosent, four years of Clinton will see to it that someone like him, possibly more extreme, does win. And they will only have themselves to blame.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956
    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Nah. Brexiteers haven't even got a coherent vision for Britain, let alone Europe.

    Britain has no vision for Europe. It had one at one point when Maggie whipped through the single market reforms, before her regret in doing so.

    Faisal Islam posted some information last night from the Thatcher archives about her encouraging Nissan to invest in the UK based on our membership of the single market.

    And the Brexiteers on Twitter went mental
    Islam is to Remain what Neil is to Leave.

    What I found particularly interesting about the Nissan story isn't that they said they'd up sticks and leave if there was a hard Brexit, because they didn't, it was that they expected the UK Government to compensate in other ways.

    That could include corporation tax cuts, or more flexible employment law, some deregulation or investment incentives.

    As always, there are both costs and benefits to leaving the EU.
    And making direct transfers from the UK taxpayer to foreign corporations, for them to stay in the UK, you will I hope agree is an unambiguous cost. As you say, no different from a low tax "enterprise zone", the type of which China has been so successful with.
    Much better to just keep reducing corporation taxes and employer NI (the "tax on jobs") to ensure continued competitiveness, than trying to engage with individual large employers looking for subsidies.
  • Options

    It's a beautiful thread header. If it's poetry then Brirain's actual relationship with Europe over 43 years has been in prose version. Negotiated semi detachment while doing quite a bit of heavy lifting. Now that the arsonists have set fire to building hoping for a Pheonix seems a trifle optermistc.

    I may come up with a new medical term: Brexichosis.

    Brexichosis: the psychosis-like changing of a previously respected, and level-headed, poster in response to the Brexit vote into a hyperbolic obsessive, who sees armageddon in every story, because their thoughts and emotions have become so impaired contact has been lost with reality.
    You mean you don't agree agree with me.
    No, you have been posting ludicrous hyperbole over recent weeks on here virtually non-stop.

    You are starting to look obsessive and unhinged, and it's not just me who's noticed.
    Not good enough. Brexiters are the establishment now. It's your responsibility. All the complexity, all the contradictions, all the compromises, all the shades of grey, all the broken promises, all the myriad variables and the fact none of us really know what will happen. These things are all yours now. You own them all and a bit of Ad Hominem bluster won't suffice. You won. You own it.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,233

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost and we are about to have our noses rubbed in it.

    There are open-hearted and generous people on both sides of the debate. I do not accept that virtue only resides with one political view.

    To give an example, there is nothing generous about imposing unemployment on the young forcing them to leave their homes in order to preserve a currency and save bond holders from the consequences of their folly. It is perfectly legitimate and, indeed, open-hearted and generous, to be in favour of the European ideal but to think that the EU has taken a wrong path and that it would be better, all things considered, for Britain's future to be outside it.
  • Options

    It is the moon on a stick, Cyclefree. The open-hearted and the generous were all in the 48%. We lost ...

    We?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,445
    edited September 2016
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    Nah. Brexiteers haven't even got a coherent vision for Britain, let alone Europe.

    Britain has no vision for Europe. It had one at one point when Maggie whipped through the single market reforms, before her regret in doing so.

    Faisal Islam posted some information last night from the Thatcher archives about her encouraging Nissan to invest in the UK based on our membership of the single market.

    And the Brexiteers on Twitter went mental
    Islam is to Remain what Neil is to Leave.

    What I found particularly interesting about the Nissan story isn't that they said they'd up sticks and leave if there was a hard Brexit, because they didn't, it was that they expected the UK Government to compensate in other ways.

    That could include corporation tax cuts, or more flexible employment law, some deregulation or investment incentives.

    As always, there are both costs and benefits to leaving the EU.
    And making direct transfers from the UK taxpayer to foreign corporations, for them to stay in the UK, you will I hope agree is an unambiguous cost. As you say, no different from a low tax "enterprise zone", the type of which China has been so successful with.
    Much better to just keep reducing corporation taxes and employer NI (the "tax on jobs") to ensure continued competitiveness, than trying to engage with individual large employers looking for subsidies.
    It will be interesting to see which course we choose to take (and which one Nissan does also).
  • Options
    Alistair said:

    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    It doesn't need to reach people who think Obama is a foreign born Muslim ( incidentally that figure has fallen since Trump recanted) it needs to reach undecideds.
    Actually having some reasons to vote for Clinton would be a start. "She's not Donald Trump" and "she's a woman" might be enough to win but I can't see a victory on those grounds leading to a happy presidency.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,209
    I know we've done this topic to death on here, but this just confirms what a joke monetary policy has been in this country and many others around the world:

    http://tinyurl.com/z24zqe9

    This sums it up:

    With ultra-low interest rates reducing the cost of servicing a mortgage, a homeowner in their late 20s spends around 15% of their household income on housing costs, while those renting spend 30%.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,015

    Alistair said:

    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    It doesn't need to reach people who think Obama is a foreign born Muslim ( incidentally that figure has fallen since Trump recanted) it needs to reach undecideds.
    Actually having some reasons to vote for Clinton would be a start. "She's not Donald Trump" and "she's a woman" might be enough to win but I can't see a victory on those grounds leading to a happy presidency.
    Yeah, I bet the GOP are kicking themselves. Any sensible candidate would be demolishing Clinton (well, maybe not demolishing, but you get the idea!)
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,233

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
    It would perhaps have been useful to have a think about what Brexit means for our role in Europe three months before rather than three months after voting to leave!

    Agreed. And I suggested as much on here. But we are where we are. There is time before Article 50 is triggered. Other leaders are waiting. We should be having that debate now.
    I do not want a relationship with the EU where we have no MEPs, no representation on the council of ministers, no representation on the Commission, yet have to follow their rules. The only positions that make sense are fully in or fully out. Having voted out we need to stick to it, even if it means blood, sweat, toil and tears.
    We have a relationship with, say, the US, where we have no representation in their political bodies and yet have to follow their rules when trading with them.

    It is possible to have a relationship, a good one, with someone without being married to them or even having sex with them.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,085

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
    It would perhaps have been useful to have a think about what Brexit means for our role in Europe three months before rather than three months after voting to leave!

    Agreed. And I suggested as much on here. But we are where we are. There is time before Article 50 is triggered. Other leaders are waiting. We should be having that debate now.
    I do not want a relationship with the EU where we have no MEPs, no representation on the council of ministers, no representation on the Commission, yet have to follow their rules. The only positions that make sense are fully in or fully out. Having voted out we need to stick to it, even if it means blood, sweat, toil and tears.
    You mean a “Norway”’s not a runner?

    Our Foreign Sec seems to want us to be a Turkey!
  • Options

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    As a concise summary of why Trump is unfit to be President it works well. Perhaps best summed up with his plan to replace Obamacare with "something terrific". Well who could fault that? Health care sorted in two words.
    There's little dispute that Trump is unfit to be President. The problem is that Clinton is too.
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Moses_ said:

    It was for many years sold to us as a single market while it became More and more obvious it was something quite different. Lisbon was rejected yet they changed the front cover and then accepted it. Brown the quisling even sneaking through the back door to sign it.

    When the voters were finally asked they voted differently to that expected. Are we now to be sent away until the country comes up with the "correct answer?" Sarkozy is again proposing just this approach though not as yet elected but in the dark corridors of the EU it's going to be considered a way forward as it has been previously. Don't like the first vote, don't worry ignore as its not binding its advisory we will change the front cover no one will notice. Is anyone seriously suggesting a vote to remain would have been for a second treated in such a way. It would have been binding and settled for ever. .

    It's not about asking for a second vote. We are out of the EU as it is. But we should start thinking hard about what settlement we want with the EU and what our vision for Britain and Europe is, even if we don't get it. We are changing. But so is Europe. And even if we are not in the EU we are still a major country in the continent of Europe and cannot turn our back on her.

    So how do we think we should go forward? That's what I think we should be asking.
    It would perhaps have been useful to have a think about what Brexit means for our role in Europe three months before rather than three months after voting to leave!

    Agreed. And I suggested as much on here. But we are where we are. There is time before Article 50 is triggered. Other leaders are waiting. We should be having that debate now.
    I do not want a relationship with the EU where we have no MEPs, no representation on the council of ministers, no representation on the Commission, yet have to follow their rules. The only positions that make sense are fully in or fully out. Having voted out we need to stick to it, even if it means blood, sweat, toil and tears.
    We have a relationship with, say, the US, where we have no representation in their political bodies and yet have to follow their rules when trading with them.

    It is possible to have a relationship, a good one, with someone without being married to them or even having sex with them.
    Even if they live next door
  • Options

    matt said:

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    It's all a conspiracy isn't it. I think it was PJ O'Rourke, no Democrat sympathiser, who's said of Clinton, she may be wrong on everything, but it's wrong within the bounds of normality.

    When people like PJoR are voting Democrat or considering not voting you really should put the conspiracy theories away.
    Few who are wealthy, notable or successful will vote Trump.

    The people who will vote Trump are ordinary people who have seen life get harder, wages fall, job insecurity rise, all the while being told they are racist crass luddites by the wealthy liberal 1% who have taken an ever bigger share of the pie.

    Liberals are so consumed with hatred of Trump that they are blind to why someone like Trump has got into the position that he is in.

    Trump may win, he may not, if he dosent, four years of Clinton will see to it that someone like him, possibly more extreme, does win. And they will only have themselves to blame.
    This is post-truth politics with a vengeance :(

  • Options
    RobD said:

    Alistair said:

    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    It doesn't need to reach people who think Obama is a foreign born Muslim ( incidentally that figure has fallen since Trump recanted) it needs to reach undecideds.
    Actually having some reasons to vote for Clinton would be a start. "She's not Donald Trump" and "she's a woman" might be enough to win but I can't see a victory on those grounds leading to a happy presidency.
    Yeah, I bet the GOP are kicking themselves. Any sensible candidate would be demolishing Clinton (well, maybe not demolishing, but you get the idea!)
    Not just kicking themselves but abstaining or even voting for Clinton:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/29/clinton-campaign-rolls-out-a-few-dozen-more-republican-endorsements/
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    p
    There was never a doubt that ever closer union has been at the heart of the EU for years. And endorsed by us (by our democratically-elected governments, Maastricht, Lisbon).

    And hence the importance in Dave's "crap deal" of our specific opt out of...ever closer union. Under that banner we could have opted out of any number of initiatives over and above those we would regardless have rejected (EU army, etc). And if we thought we were still getting bulldozed we could have elected a party to ensure we bloody well did opt out of them.

    Shoulda, woulda, coulda.

    But Dave's doc is arguably one of the most misunderstood pieces of negotation we have seen. Immigration aside, where it was an abject failure.

    It had no legal force and as soon as we had tried to use it we would have lost at the ECJ.

    Fortunately, the voters grasped that.
  • Options

    matt said:

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    It's all a conspiracy isn't it. I think it was PJ O'Rourke, no Democrat sympathiser, who's said of Clinton, she may be wrong on everything, but it's wrong within the bounds of normality.

    When people like PJoR are voting Democrat or considering not voting you really should put the conspiracy theories away.
    Few who are wealthy, notable or successful will vote Trump.

    The people who will vote Trump are ordinary people who have seen life get harder, wages fall, job insecurity rise, all the while being told they are racist crass luddites by the wealthy liberal 1% who have taken an ever bigger share of the pie.

    Liberals are so consumed with hatred of Trump that they are blind to why someone like Trump has got into the position that he is in.

    Trump may win, he may not, if he dosent, four years of Clinton will see to it that someone like him, possibly more extreme, does win. And they will only have themselves to blame.
    Wealthy liberal 1% ? Surely the importance is the wealthy conservative Republican 1% who are opposing Trump.

    The lasting significance of Trump might be that he has fractured prior assumptions about the Republican coalition by showing the appeal of the Tea Party and other right-wing groups was that they were outsiders (a NOTA vote, if you like) and had nothing to do with their right-wing policies. Indeed, it goes further than that because Trump has also exposed that many Republican voters do not even support mainstream Republican positions like free markets.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,956

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    As a concise summary of why Trump is unfit to be President it works well. Perhaps best summed up with his plan to replace Obamacare with "something terrific". Well who could fault that? Health care sorted in two words.
    There's little dispute that Trump is unfit to be President. The problem is that Clinton is too.
    If either party had chosen absolutely anyone else, they'd be looking at a landslide now.

    The debriefing in both parties after this election will be extensive. The losing party will be quicker to understand this than the winner, and will be better placed to field a group of good candidates in 2020.

    The one thing that's almost certain is that this will be a one term presidency.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    RobD said:

    Alistair said:

    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    It doesn't need to reach people who think Obama is a foreign born Muslim ( incidentally that figure has fallen since Trump recanted) it needs to reach undecideds.
    Actually having some reasons to vote for Clinton would be a start. "She's not Donald Trump" and "she's a woman" might be enough to win but I can't see a victory on those grounds leading to a happy presidency.
    Yeah, I bet the GOP are kicking themselves. Any sensible candidate would be demolishing Clinton (well, maybe not demolishing, but you get the idea!)
    The GOP are now in the grip of ideologues just like Labour
  • Options
    PlatoSaidPlatoSaid Posts: 10,383
    Anyone know what this means - serious or not yet

    Bloomberg
    BREAKING: Deutsche Bank shares fall below €10 for first time - follow our coverage https://t.co/64SID8b5K2 https://t.co/ShvZziPx1x
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187
    In the end the most likely outcome is May imposes a requirement for EU workers to have a job offer before coming to the UK and the UK leaves the single market but there is still enough room on both sides for some sort of free trade deal to be done
  • Options
    Looks like it's black friday for Deutsche bank....
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,372
    To declare bias, I like Cyclefree - had the pleasure of meeting for a few seconds, and it bore out the impression on the forum: vigotous, charismatic and bright. So I really want to like her pieces. And if Cameron has proposed something like this a few years ago, he'd have had an interested audience.

    But. Two snags about this one.

    First, it doesn't actually suggest what we might propose, so it's hard to get a feeling for whether it's possible to develop a vision that most of us would find attractive: the temptation is to project whatever we'd personally like (e.g. Jeremy would say, "Yes, Cyclefree is right, we should have a Europe that reinforces compulsory social protection and controls on multinationals"). We can all agree that a positive arrangement would be nice, but the devil really is in the detail, or at least the chapter headings.

    Second, the EU is really not in the mood to listen to bright ideas from Britain on what they should be like. The analogy to a divorce is the spouse who has lived in a period of mingle amity and irritation with a difficult partner for many years. The partner has said they're going to walk out. That's a shame, but oh well. But what's this - the partner has a detailed plan for what I should do after they leave? FFS. If you're going, let's sort out who gets what and then just... go.
  • Options
    We're now told that the adverse effects of Brexit wont be felt for years.

    Not what some Remainers were saying on 27 June:

    " Observation at work as trading in RBS and Barclays shares are suspended

    In hindsight Dave and George didn't go hard enough on the economic consequences of a Leave vote. "

    " HA HA

    HA HA HA HA HA

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

    We were warned there would be chaos. There is now chaos. There will be different visions of how to resolve the chaos. Should we ask voters? "

    " What a mess.

    I had some interesting conversations with friends in the City over the weekend. The mood could scarecly be blacker. One friend who has recently retired from a senior position with a Japanese bank, and who is definitely not someone prone to exaggeration, said he thought it was the end of London as the leading financial centre in the timezone. "

    I wont put names to quotes to spare embarrassment.

    Meanwhile the steady disintegration of the German banking sector is today's business news.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,514

    matt said:

    Establishment closes ranks quelle surprise?
    It's all a conspiracy isn't it. I think it was PJ O'Rourke, no Democrat sympathiser, who's said of Clinton, she may be wrong on everything, but it's wrong within the bounds of normality.

    When people like PJoR are voting Democrat or considering not voting you really should put the conspiracy theories away.
    Few who are wealthy, notable or successful will vote Trump.

    The people who will vote Trump are ordinary people who have seen life get harder, wages fall, job insecurity rise, all the while being told they are racist crass luddites by the wealthy liberal 1% who have taken an ever bigger share of the pie.

    Liberals are so consumed with hatred of Trump that they are blind to why someone like Trump has got into the position that he is in.

    Trump may win, he may not, if he dosent, four years of Clinton will see to it that someone like him, possibly more extreme, does win. And they will only have themselves to blame.
    Wealthy liberal 1% ? Surely the importance is the wealthy conservative Republican 1% who are opposing Trump.

    The lasting significance of Trump might be that he has fractured prior assumptions about the Republican coalition by showing the appeal of the Tea Party and other right-wing groups was that they were outsiders (a NOTA vote, if you like) and had nothing to do with their right-wing policies. Indeed, it goes further than that because Trump has also exposed that many Republican voters do not even support mainstream Republican positions like free markets.
    And it's the first time that america's particular brand of extreme Christianity really isn't playing any role at all in this political contest.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Latest Trump foundation stuff is the it isn't licenced in New York to solicit donations - and it has solicited donations.

    Not being licenced means avoiding a yearly audit that would ask difficult questions about buying paintings and paying personal legal fees from foundation cash.

    It is starting to look like a death of a thousand cuts for Trump. I thought it would be a giant flame out but instead he goes down with a slow leak.
  • Options
    It would be great if it could be as Cyclefree suggests. But this is not a divorce - there is no judge to fall back on if no agreement can be reached. What's more we have the Three Amigos and other cabinet deadweights on our side, with Hammond and maybe May the only realists in the room. It does not look that much better on the EU side. I suspect events will force the hands of both sides.
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Alistair said:

    Toms said:

    JackW said:

    In it's first ever POTUS endorsement "US Today" picks Clinton and savages Trump :

    http://www.usatoday.com/opinion/

    That's a forceful editorial and pretty well says it all.
    Unfortunately its logic may not reach those souls who are Trumpeters.
    It doesn't need to reach people who think Obama is a foreign born Muslim ( incidentally that figure has fallen since Trump recanted) it needs to reach undecideds.
    Actually having some reasons to vote for Clinton would be a start. "She's not Donald Trump" and "she's a woman" might be enough to win but I can't see a victory on those grounds leading to a happy presidency.
    Yeah, I bet the GOP are kicking themselves. Any sensible candidate would be demolishing Clinton (well, maybe not demolishing, but you get the idea!)
    The GOP are now in the grip of ideologues just like Labour
    “In my view, Donald Trump may be the least qualified, least intelligent and least stable person ever nominated by a major party,” said Jim Cicconi, a deputy chief of staff under former president George H.W. Bush.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,187

    We're now told that the adverse effects of Brexit wont be felt for years.

    Not what some Remainers were saying on 27 June:

    " Observation at work as trading in RBS and Barclays shares are suspended

    In hindsight Dave and George didn't go hard enough on the economic consequences of a Leave vote. "

    " HA HA

    HA HA HA HA HA

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

    We were warned there would be chaos. There is now chaos. There will be different visions of how to resolve the chaos. Should we ask voters? "

    " What a mess.

    I had some interesting conversations with friends in the City over the weekend. The mood could scarecly be blacker. One friend who has recently retired from a senior position with a Japanese bank, and who is definitely not someone prone to exaggeration, said he thought it was the end of London as the leading financial centre in the timezone. "

    I wont put names to quotes to spare embarrassment.

    Meanwhile the steady disintegration of the German banking sector is today's business news.

    In the time zone? Who is taking over then? Tenerife?
This discussion has been closed.