You mean leaving the single market would be bad for the economy?
Who knew, somebody should have said during the referendum.
Theresa May does not want to go down as the PM who botched Brexit, and fucked up the economy. I have faith she is cannier than you think, and will get a classic EU fudge where both sides can claim victory, and the economic damage is limited
It is the one thing the EU is usually quite good at.
I keep on asking people this question, and am yet to receive a satisfactory response.
Why would the EU give us a better deal than we currently have, or even a deal as good as we've currently got?
Well, it is possible that the political terms of trade within Europe change during the two years' or so negotiation. Freedom of movement as an absolute principle could conceivably be gone - one need only look at public debate in Hungary and France to see that's possible - which would significantly ease May's task.
French prez election is crucial. If Sarko wins, I reckon we could see a major offer from the EU. It suits them. As you say, the Hungarian vote proves that the era of FoM and Schengen (as we knew it) is over. Politicians across the EU are taking note.
If the old Federalist Juppe wins (and he is favourite) May has a significantly harder task.
Had Cameron been smarter, his renegotiation would still be going on, and his interlocutors would be in a far more uncomfortable position than when they shafted him (with his almost-collaboration, it has to be said).
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
Well they can always just ignore the first one...... Interesting theory on why second referenda results change.
"On three occasions – Denmark on the Maastricht Treaty, Ireland on the Nice Treaty and Ireland again on the Lisbon Treaty – voters have initially rejected an EU treaty only to vote in favour of it in a second referendum. Based on research conducted in Denmark and Ireland, Ece Özlem Atikcan assesses the reasons why voters changed their minds in each case.
She illustrates that ‘Yes’ campaigners in both states learned from previous referendums and developed an approach that reframed the issue by emphasising concessions gained from the EU and the risks of rejecting a treaty for a second time."
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
God this ex bbc producer on Louis thereoux programme is worrying.
Does it add anything to what we already knew?
No no. It was the opposite. She basically said I didn't see anything (despite being long time producer for his programmes) & it was time of sex, drugs & rock n roll... thereoux then pointed out the audience was all kids....
BBC reporting it as "Hungary referendum rejects EU mandatory migrant plan"
Also it looks like the Hungarians are going to implement the rejection.
"Right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban urged Hungarians to reject the EU scheme, describing it as a threat to Europe's security and way of life. He described the result as "overwhelming" and said the EU "cannot force" Hungary to accept migrants. He urged EU decision makers to take note of the referendum."
Well they can always just ignore the first one...... Interesting theory on why second referenda results change.
"On three occasions – Denmark on the Maastricht Treaty, Ireland on the Nice Treaty and Ireland again on the Lisbon Treaty – voters have initially rejected an EU treaty only to vote in favour of it in a second referendum. Based on research conducted in Denmark and Ireland, Ece Özlem Atikcan assesses the reasons why voters changed their minds in each case.
She illustrates that ‘Yes’ campaigners in both states learned from previous referendums and developed an approach that reframed the issue by emphasising concessions gained from the EU and the risks of rejecting a treaty for a second time."
The vote-til-you-get-it-right approach was certainly interesting, from the EU, but I prefer their later work, in France and the Netherlands, over the Constitution, where it was vote-and-then-we-will-completely-ignore-you, and then-simply-impose-what-we-want-anyway
The EU is utterly disgusting. A noisome fraud. If excrement could excrete, the excreta would resemble the EU.
Surely in every single case it's the national government which ignored the result, not the EU as such.
Watching the mainstream media now approaching critical mass and in full cry against Trump, his penchant for being sidetracked into picking stupid and pointless fights with non-political figures in spite of Kellyanne Conway's pleading (the latest with Alicia Machado, whom CNN also attacked and called fat etc), and so on, unless there is an October Surprise of truly stupendous proportions, I just don't see how Trump can win this.
For all the exposure of Clinton's email etc, and the rest of her dirty laundry, lying and dishonesty, the corruption and scandal of the Foundation, given Trump's predilection for being sidetracked, picking dumb fights, and not being able to walk away from anything plus the media's relentless negative gaze on him, I think this one is pretty much done.
Just playing devil's advocate, but one way it might not be is if the Clinton campaign thinks, "It's just so easy to bait him!" and doubles down which might run the risk dragging the campaign down to his level and then being beaten by experience in the same way that most of his Republican rivals did eventually.
I don't know about "dragging the campaign down to his level" - I think you have this the wrong way round. Clinton's whole campaign is against Trump - she doesn't waste any time on policies at all. Trump at least spends some time on policy. If he is elected you know what he'll do - immigration, the VA and so on. We have no idea what Clinton wants to do, as all she does is attack Trump. Occasionally she'll refer to policies being on her website, but it's all Trump all the way for her. She has outspent him in some states by over 50 to 1, and by large amounts everywhere, but the margins are still small.
I was thinking more in terms of the personal interaction in the debates. In the primaries, Trump wasn't shy about deploying the same kind of rhetoric as he uses in his stump speeches (lyin' Ted etc) whereas, in his own way he was quite restrained in the debate with Hillary. If he comes out in the next one in full 'crooked Hillary is not fit to be President' mode it could be a game changer. There must be a 'bait' point for her too.
well, no, she has experience of being baited, and doesn't rise to it, unlike racist manchild Trump.
Clinton has lots of policy. She talks about it all the time. The media doesn't cover it though.
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
he was ... he might have done better than Danny mind you
I have a tenner on Hilary in North Carolina based on the early postal vote returns. I know I've advised caution in interpreting them but for the Republican response rate to be down on 2012 is astonishing.
In the last 40 years I Don't think there has been at least one headline at some point during their conference week that has not threatened some sort of Tory splits or civil war over the EU.
A headline flogged to death and now people just ignore.
I have a tenner on Hilary in North Carolina based on the early postal vote returns. I know I've advised caution in interpreting them but for the Republican response rate to be down on 2012 is astonishing.
Aren't those totals on the order of ~100s of votes? Compared to an electorate of millions...
You mean leaving the single market would be bad for the economy?
Who knew, somebody should have said during the referendum.
Theresa May does not want to go down as the PM who botched Brexit, and fucked up the economy. I have faith she is cannier than you think, and will get a classic EU fudge where both sides can claim victory, and the economic damage is limited
It is the one thing the EU is usually quite good at.
A depreciating £ is *good* for the economy.
Unfortunately, it is bad for people who are paid in GBP, or whose life savings are in GBP, or who buy things that are imported from outside the UK, or who make things from raw materials from outside the UK. I think that's everybody on this board except Tyson.
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
he was ... he might have done better than Danny mind you
thank god for our continental European team-mates today, if it was still GB&I then we'd have scored 0 in the singles...
in fact the only players to lose today were from GB&I, perhaps they should drop us from the European team in future Ryder Cups what with Brexit and all
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
he was ... he might have done better than Danny mind you
I have a tenner on Hilary in North Carolina based on the early postal vote returns. I know I've advised caution in interpreting them but for the Republican response rate to be down on 2012 is astonishing.
Aren't those totals on the order of ~100s of votes? Compared to an electorate of millions...
its an example of a potential lack of republican enthusiasm for someone coming across as a racist idiot on national tv
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
he was ... he might have done better than Danny mind you
Louis thereoux programme on saville is rather disappointing. I don't think we have learned anything new.
Don't think it was supposed to bring anything new to the party, rather it was meant to "atone" for not nailing him first time around by giving a voice to his victims...
Louis thereoux programme on saville is rather disappointing. I don't think we have learned anything new.
Don't think it was supposed to bring anything new to the party, rather it was meant to "atone" for not nailing him first time around by giving a voice to his victims...
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
he was ... he might have done better than Danny mind you
At least Spurs won.
I'm gonna back them for the title.
at 20-1 too?
Alas no, a mere 9/1
I bottled out anyway this morning... it was obviously huge 'value' if we were going to put on a performance but then again £ would be the least of my thoughts if Spurs did win it!!!!!
"A number of stories surfaced over the weekend of isolated incidents involving fans shouting abuse and making insulting comments to the European team during matches. During the fourballs on Saturday afternoon, one fan made an obscene comment relating to the late Seve Ballesteros which was clearly audible to television viewers"
I seem to recollect during one competition the US WAGS ran across the green in high heels to congratulate their team before the game had finished and further puts were to be made.
"A number of stories surfaced over the weekend of isolated incidents involving fans shouting abuse and making insulting comments to the European team during matches. During the fourballs on Saturday afternoon, one fan made an obscene comment relating to the late Seve Ballesteros which was clearly audible to television viewers"
I seem to recollect during one competition the US WAGS ran across the green in high heels to congratulate their team before the game had finished and further puts were to be made.
The knuckle draggers were even more numerous this time around....
well done westy, 2 up with 3 to go but manage to lose against one of their weakest players (a rookie no less) and lose the last 3 holes, the last with a bogey to ensure its the point you lose that is the winning point...
probably be our next ryder captain...
So long as we don't blame Danny Willlet's brother, who was spot on about the American crowds.
he was ... he might have done better than Danny mind you
At least Spurs won.
I'm gonna back them for the title.
at 20-1 too?
Alas no, a mere 9/1
I bottled out anyway this morning... it was obviously huge 'value' if we were going to put on a performance but then again £ would be the least of my thoughts if Spurs did win it!!!!!
thank god for our continental European team-mates today, if it was still GB&I then we'd have scored 0 in the singles...
in fact the only players to lose today were from GB&I, perhaps they should drop us from the European team in future Ryder Cups what with Brexit and all
The Brits won several team matches but the US was due a win
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Nick Herbert has impeccable Eurosceptic credentials from his time as Chief Executive of Business for Sterling.
I believe he's called Boris, David Davis, and Liam Fox the three blind mice
They're more like the Marx Brothers: Groucho, Chico and Harpo.
Do you want it hard or soft? In earlier days such a question at the Conservative party conference would probably have been scandalous. Today it is entirely innocent, the question du jour. Does Britain sever its relationship with Europe with one drop of the guillotine’s blade, the “hard Brexit” favoured by the right? Or does it attempt to negotiate a new deal with the EU to preserve privileged access to the single market?....
...The jury is out on the new government structure to deliver our departure from the EU. The so-called “three Brexiteers” have so far rather more resembled three blind mice, stumbling around the world’s capitals with inconsistent messages, united only in their assurance that it will be all right on the night.
May's promise to invoke Article 50 by the end of March means the process will be complete by the next general election and a new repeal of the European Communities Act prevents legal challenges but ensures the UK will enshrine EU law as is in UK law and then repeal as needed
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Nick Herbert has impeccable Eurosceptic credentials from his time as Chief Executive of Business for Sterling.
I believe he's called Boris, David Davis, and Liam Fox the three blind mice
They're more like the Marx Brothers: Groucho, Chico and Harpo.
Do you want it hard or soft? In earlier days such a question at the Conservative party conference would probably have been scandalous. Today it is entirely innocent, the question du jour. Does Britain sever its relationship with Europe with one drop of the guillotine’s blade, the “hard Brexit” favoured by the right? Or does it attempt to negotiate a new deal with the EU to preserve privileged access to the single market?....
...The jury is out on the new government structure to deliver our departure from the EU. The so-called “three Brexiteers” have so far rather more resembled three blind mice, stumbling around the world’s capitals with inconsistent messages, united only in their assurance that it will be all right on the night.
He makes some good points. But if you want the EU to drop their "free movement or out of the single market" dichotomy, as he is suggesting, then saying "fine, we'll take the second" is the best way to have them scrambling for a compromise.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Nick Herbert has impeccable Eurosceptic credentials from his time as Chief Executive of Business for Sterling.
I believe he's called Boris, David Davis, and Liam Fox the three blind mice
They're more like the Marx Brothers: Groucho, Chico and Harpo.
Do you want it hard or soft? In earlier days such a question at the Conservative party conference would probably have been scandalous. Today it is entirely innocent, the question du jour. Does Britain sever its relationship with Europe with one drop of the guillotine’s blade, the “hard Brexit” favoured by the right? Or does it attempt to negotiate a new deal with the EU to preserve privileged access to the single market?....
...The jury is out on the new government structure to deliver our departure from the EU. The so-called “three Brexiteers” have so far rather more resembled three blind mice, stumbling around the world’s capitals with inconsistent messages, united only in their assurance that it will be all right on the night.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Doesn't the Treaty of Rome date from the 1950s?
Yes and at the time Britain was still coming to terms with the loss of empire while continental Europe was forging ahead building the future. Plus ca change...
I have a tenner on Hilary in North Carolina based on the early postal vote returns. I know I've advised caution in interpreting them but for the Republican response rate to be down on 2012 is astonishing.
Aren't those totals on the order of ~100s of votes? Compared to an electorate of millions...
13000 votes returned so far. So tiny by total figures but it speaks to me about lack of GOTV.
You mean leaving the single market would be bad for the economy?
Who knew, somebody should have said during the referendum.
Theresa May does not want to go down as the PM who botched Brexit, and fucked up the economy. I have faith she is cannier than you think, and will get a classic EU fudge where both sides can claim victory, and the economic damage is limited
It is the one thing the EU is usually quite good at.
A depreciating £ is *good* for the economy.
Unfortunately, it is bad for people who are paid in GBP, or whose life savings are in GBP, or who buy things that are imported from outside the UK, or who make things from raw materials from outside the UK. I think that's everybody on this board except Tyson.
I think tyson earns in sterling.
It is pretty good for me and other government servants. When the private sector falls behind, we make up lost ground. There is also the £350 million per week into the NHS to look forward to.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Nick Herbert has impeccable Eurosceptic credentials from his time as Chief Executive of Business for Sterling.
I believe he's called Boris, David Davis, and Liam Fox the three blind mice
They're more like the Marx Brothers: Groucho, Chico and Harpo.
Do you want it hard or soft? In earlier days such a question at the Conservative party conference would probably have been scandalous. Today it is entirely innocent, the question du jour. Does Britain sever its relationship with Europe with one drop of the guillotine’s blade, the “hard Brexit” favoured by the right? Or does it attempt to negotiate a new deal with the EU to preserve privileged access to the single market?....
...The jury is out on the new government structure to deliver our departure from the EU. The so-called “three Brexiteers” have so far rather more resembled three blind mice, stumbling around the world’s capitals with inconsistent messages, united only in their assurance that it will be all right on the night.
Any Tory writing in the Guardian to attack their own Government, from the Left, should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.
I wonder if we are heading for a realignment. "Free liberals" like Nick Herbert represent just 7% of the electorate though. "Common sense" conservatives and "New Britain" patriotic types together represent 50% between then. May knows where the votes are:
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Doesn't the Treaty of Rome date from the 1950s?
Yes and at the time Britain was still coming to terms with the loss of empire while continental Europe was forging ahead building the future. Plus ca change...
So the EU (or previous names for it) is an outdated 1950s throwback?
Practically, I'm not sure whether the hard v soft Brexit debate really can come to a head in Parliament.
Parliament's obligations here seem to be a) to endorse the repeal of the ECA (which needs to be done anyway, no matter what the final deal is) and b) to ratify the eventual deal negotiated by the government. Now, after 2 years of debate and discussions, when the deal is laid on the table it appears to me that the choice either comes down to voting to endorse what the government had negotiated or otherwise to reject it. If the deal is rejected by parliament, as the Article 50 process has come to its end, a vote to reject is essentially a vote tantamount to a complete withdrawal I.e a vote for the 'hardest' Brexit.
So, doesn't it in fact come down to the government's deal vs no deal and immediate unconditional withdrawal?
The ball is essentially in the government's court here, whatever negotiating stance they take. Take it or leave it, basically. This does seem to be the reality of the constitutional position. The position of MPs here, at this stage, short of influencing government policy in the negotiations, isn't really the strongest.
Unfortunately the referendum was won primarily on controlling immigration which is incompatible with membership of the single market (under present arrangements)
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
Doesn't the Treaty of Rome date from the 1950s?
Yes and at the time Britain was still coming to terms with the loss of empire while continental Europe was forging ahead building the future. Plus ca change...
So the EU (or previous names for it) is an outdated 1950s throwback?
I would argue that the reason the EU is in trouble is that it is an Imperial Dream. Driven (at first) by France leveraging the economic power of West Germany to give her (France) the global role that her statesmen believed her due.
The problem is that it is turning out to be the Holy Roman Empire part II.....
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
The boot's on the other foot now. The only way to have resolved the splits would have been a 60% plus win for remain, which Cameron knew and in his hubris thought he could deliver.
I hate to interrupt WankingAboutBrexit.com with something so non-U as a question about US politics, but some of you may have heard of Allan Lichtman and his "13 Keys" model. He's made a prediction that Trump will win[1]. He exhibits a characteristic that too many modellers exhibit: he rows back on the prediction, but there y'go. Anyhoo, DYOR
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
The boot's on the other foot now. The only way to have resolved the splits would have been a 60% plus win for remain, which Cameron knew and in his hubris thought he could deliver.
Pretty sure us being out of the EU will also resolve them. There will be very few (if any) Tories pushing for us to rejoin the EU.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
The boot's on the other foot now. The only way to have resolved the splits would have been a 60% plus win for remain, which Cameron knew and in his hubris thought he could deliver.
It's very disappointing. Whatever MPs' personal views, we did have a referendum about it. The public voted by a clear margin for Leave, and the main reasons were bringing back lawmaking powers to the UK and controlling immigration. Both reasons are inconsistent with single market membership.
I hate to interrupt WankingAboutBrexit.com with something so non-U as a question about US politics, but some of you may have heard of Allan Lichtman and his "13 Keys" model. He's made a prediction that Trump will win[1]. He exhibits a characteristic that too many modellers exhibit: he rows back on the prediction, but there y'go. Anyhoo, DYOR
Well, well, the Leave result in the referendum means Brexit. Brexit means Brexit, and therefore an end to free movement and therefore an end to full access to the Single Market. Who'd a thunk it?
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
I they hadn't boycotted do you seriously think the referendum would have got close to 100% turnout? That 55% includes both boycotters and apathetics.
Boris Johnson was standing in the leadership contest with signals of a clear pro-EEA platform. But he was pushed out and May won. Remain supporters at the time were delighted. I remember thinking they might regret putting personal vengeance over policy when it happened.
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
I they hadn't boycotted do you seriously think the referendum would have got close to 100% turnout? That 55% includes both boycotters and apathetics.
Makes FA difference. The rule says 50% turnout and the Racists did not get it.
- Leave is good for Tory party unity - No free movement and no membership of the single market was always the most likely outcome given the result and lack of European indications of compromise (Sarky aside) - Leavers are thrilled by the practical idea of the GRB
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
I they hadn't boycotted do you seriously think the referendum would have got close to 100% turnout? That 55% includes both boycotters and apathetics.
Makes FA difference. The rule says 50% turnout and the Racists did not get it.
44% of Hungarians are racists? Or maybe they mis-voted on this occasion.
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
I they hadn't boycotted do you seriously think the referendum would have got close to 100% turnout? That 55% includes both boycotters and apathetics.
Makes FA difference. The rule says 50% turnout and the Racists did not get it.
Actually I was refusing FF43's claim that 55% of Hungarians hate the PM more than they dislike immigrants.
Well, well, the Leave result in the referendum means Brexit. Brexit means Brexit, and therefore an end to free movement and therefore an end to full access to the Single Market. Who'd a thunk it?
Given the ramifications of the decision will begin to be felt long before March 2019, don't be too sure that the next election is in the bag for the Tories. I work in Manufacturing and there is zero investment going on now. The reduced GDP growth is being run by consumption and it would take too long for sentiment to change.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
The boot's on the other foot now. The only way to have resolved the splits would have been a 60% plus win for remain, which Cameron knew and in his hubris thought he could deliver.
Pretty sure us being out of the EU will also resolve them. There will be very few (if any) Tories pushing for us to rejoin the EU.
Leaving the EU doesn't change the fact that:
- The EU exists - We were part of it - We were removed by a dishonest campaign in which many senior Tories played a prominent role (in some cases out of naked personal ambition)
It's unreasonable to expect that this will not have salience for a very long time to come.
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
I they hadn't boycotted do you seriously think the referendum would have got close to 100% turnout? That 55% includes both boycotters and apathetics.
Makes FA difference. The rule says 50% turnout and the Racists did not get it.
44% of Hungarians are racists? Or maybe they mis-voted on this occasion.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
The boot's on the other foot now. The only way to have resolved the splits would have been a 60% plus win for remain, which Cameron knew and in his hubris thought he could deliver.
Pretty sure us being out of the EU will also resolve them. There will be very few (if any) Tories pushing for us to rejoin the EU.
Leaving the EU doesn't change the fact that:
- The EU exists - We were part of it - We were removed by a dishonest campaign in which many senior Tories played a prominent role
It's unreasonable to expect that this will not have salience for a very long time to come.
Given that we would be reapplying, and would have to adopt the Euro, join Schengen etc., I seriously doubt rejoining will be on the cards, especially so in the Tory party.
Well, well, the Leave result in the referendum means Brexit. Brexit means Brexit, and therefore an end to free movement and therefore an end to full access to the Single Market. Who'd a thunk it?
Given the ramifications of the decision will begin to be felt long before March 2019, don't be too sure that the next election is in the bag for the Tories. I work in Manufacturing and there is zero investment going on now. The reduced GDP growth is being run by consumption and it would take too long for sentiment to change.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
It seems like a contingent of hardcore Remainers are now deciding to take up their place as the headbangers in the party, waging a guerilla war against the leadership.
The boot's on the other foot now. The only way to have resolved the splits would have been a 60% plus win for remain, which Cameron knew and in his hubris thought he could deliver.
Pretty sure us being out of the EU will also resolve them. There will be very few (if any) Tories pushing for us to rejoin the EU.
Leaving the EU doesn't change the fact that:
- The EU exists - We were part of it - We were removed by a dishonest campaign in which many senior Tories played a prominent role
It's unreasonable to expect that this will not have salience for a very long time to come.
Given that we would be reapplying, and would have to adopt the Euro, join Schengen etc., I seriously doubt rejoining will be on the cards, especially so in the Tory party.
None of that is necessary for 'which side were you on?' to motivate bitter splits.
So basically Yes voters stayed at home to invalidate the result?
lol. I am fairly sure that is how the EU will "interpret" the result.
This actually makes it worse. The EU might still try and enforce the migration quota, but Orban cannot ignore a vote by half his people where 98% - literally, 98% - say NO to migrants.
The era of populism is upon us.
Orban's bluff has been called.
More migrants for Hungary, then - surely that's the "sovereign will" of the Magyar people?
I think Orban will still refuse to accept migrants given that 44% of all Hungarians voted against migrants, 1% are in favour of migrants, and 55% didn't bother to express their opinion on this.
My interpretation is that 55% of Hungarians hate their prime minister more than they dislike immigrants.
I they hadn't boycotted do you seriously think the referendum would have got close to 100% turnout? That 55% includes both boycotters and apathetics.
Makes FA difference. The rule says 50% turnout and the Racists did not get it.
Actually I was refusing FF43's claim that 55% of Hungarians hate the PM more than they dislike immigrants.
OK, simplification on the percentages, but the sentiment was there, I am sure. More precisely a proportion of the electorate despise Orban and recognise the referendum for the gesture politics that it is, and that that proportion was big enough to ensure the turnout qualification wasn't met despite the Russian style media control in that country and so Orban lost his referendum.
Comments
51.6% Yes to Devolution
48.4% No to Devoluution
But turnout was 63.7%, so YES got less than 33% of the total electorate, less than th 40% required by the Scotland Act 1978.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_devolution_referendum,_1979
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_Act_1978
The EU is the worst version of Europe, apart from all the other Europes that have been tried over the years.
"On three occasions – Denmark on the Maastricht Treaty, Ireland on the Nice Treaty and Ireland again on the Lisbon Treaty – voters have initially rejected an EU treaty only to vote in favour of it in a second referendum. Based on research conducted in Denmark and Ireland, Ece Özlem Atikcan assesses the reasons why voters changed their minds in each case.
She illustrates that ‘Yes’ campaigners in both states learned from previous referendums and developed an approach that reframed the issue by emphasising concessions gained from the EU and the risks of rejecting a treaty for a second time."
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2015/10/19/asking-the-public-twice-why-do-voters-change-their-minds-in-second-referendums-on-eu-treaties/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icelandic_parliamentary_election,_2016
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1883306/pakistan-threatens-to-destroy-india-with-nuclear-bomb-as-atomic-enemies-edge-to-the-brink-of-war/
Though the Indian counterstrike would pretty much turn Pakistan into molten glass..
Partition working well I see. Next test series should be lively.
I think Bernie has come out and said Clinton was right. And her actual interview is perfectly reasonable and sympathetic
Clinton has lots of policy. She talks about it all the time. The media doesn't cover it though.
probably be our next ryder captain...
A headline flogged to death and now people just ignore.
I'm gonna back them for the title.
in fact the only players to lose today were from GB&I, perhaps they should drop us from the European team in future Ryder Cups what with Brexit and all
no wikileaks announcement this week it seems
1) Patrick Reed
2) Dustin Johnson
3) Zach Johnson
4) Lee Westwood
5) Phil Mickleson.
Of course, it's just the press inventing this idea of Tory splits.
"A number of stories surfaced over the weekend of isolated incidents involving fans shouting abuse and making insulting comments to the European team during matches. During the fourballs on Saturday afternoon, one fan made an obscene comment relating to the late Seve Ballesteros which was clearly audible to television viewers"
Thing is that was in 2012.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/golf/rydercup/9577684/Ryder-Cup-2012-Investigation-after-American-fans-abuse-Europes-players-wives-and-late-captain-Seve-Ballesteros.html
I seem to recollect during one competition the US WAGS ran across the green in high heels to congratulate their team before the game had finished and further puts were to be made.
I believe he's called Boris, David Davis, and Liam Fox the three blind mice
...The jury is out on the new government structure to deliver our departure from the EU. The so-called “three Brexiteers” have so far rather more resembled three blind mice, stumbling around the world’s capitals with inconsistent messages, united only in their assurance that it will be all right on the night.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/02/hard-brexit-eu-trade-deal
Total electorate is about 4.4 million.
It is pretty good for me and other government servants. When the private sector falls behind, we make up lost ground. There is also the £350 million per week into the NHS to look forward to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_Kingdom_general_election_1955_in_Scotland.svg
http://opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Dead-Centre-British-politics4_lr.pdf
Parliament's obligations here seem to be a) to endorse the repeal of the ECA (which needs to be done anyway, no matter what the final deal is) and b) to ratify the eventual deal negotiated by the government. Now, after 2 years of debate and discussions, when the deal is laid on the table it appears to me that the choice either comes down to voting to endorse what the government had negotiated or otherwise to reject it. If the deal is rejected by parliament, as the Article 50 process has come to its end, a vote to reject is essentially a vote tantamount to a complete withdrawal I.e a vote for the 'hardest' Brexit.
So, doesn't it in fact come down to the government's deal vs no deal and immediate unconditional withdrawal?
The ball is essentially in the government's court here, whatever negotiating stance they take. Take it or leave it, basically. This does seem to be the reality of the constitutional position. The position of MPs here, at this stage, short of influencing government policy in the negotiations, isn't really the strongest.
Unfortunately the referendum was won primarily on controlling immigration which is incompatible with membership of the single market (under present arrangements)
So...
The problem is that it is turning out to be the Holy Roman Empire part II.....
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/23/trump-is-headed-for-a-win-says-professor-whos-predicted-30-years-of-presidential-outcomes-correctly/
- Leave is good for Tory party unity
- No free movement and no membership of the single market was always the most likely outcome given the result and lack of European indications of compromise (Sarky aside)
- Leavers are thrilled by the practical idea of the GRB
- The EU exists
- We were part of it
- We were removed by a dishonest campaign in which many senior Tories played a prominent role (in some cases out of naked personal ambition)
It's unreasonable to expect that this will not have salience for a very long time to come.