@britainelects: UKIP GAIN Headland & Harbour (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Blimey
Amazing. A unilateralist as leader, who supports unlimited immigration and doesn't seem to bother about the North, and the voters look elsewhere? Labour are gone outside of the largest metro areas.
They should be. We will see what the effects are in next May's elections and in 2018.
Not a great night for Labour so far: down 28% in Wales and losing to UKIP in Hartlepool.
They are up in the other Welsh seat result. I find it hard to get excited about these things, as the number of voters is so extremely small as to be statistically irrelevant.
I see impartial Evan Davis calling ukip fruitcakes and nutters and you can't have a leader who started a fight. I wonder if he would ask labour of you could have a leader and shadow chancellor who are terrorist sympathizers.
And Evan being rabidly anti-EU, too.
We get so used to the bias that often it barely registers.
Open and tolerant Sweden...not allowed to film on public streets despite being with a police officer...
I think Sweden is increasingly dysfunctional.
Sweden is increasingly bewildered, I think. Decades of cosy homogeneity, liberal secularism, and high living standards have left them utterly unprepared.
Not a great night for Labour so far: down 28% in Wales and losing to UKIP in Hartlepool.
They are up in the other Welsh seat result. I find it hard to get excited about these things, as the number of voters is so extremely small as to be statistically irrelevant.
It seems to me that Cameron, Corbyn and Farron all do not understand the country they seek (or sought) to govern. Whether May does we shall see.
So far, she seems to be the only one who seems to have some inkling that there are very many voters who do not accept the assumptions and the political realities which have been the default for so long.
The difference between understanding the 52% and the 48% is critical, but a very small one.
Do the Brexiteers understand the 48% any more than Cameron understand the 52%?
A large part of the 48% were frightened into voting through project fear and as time goes on they are going to feel that they were duped. At one point I feared an interest rate rise because the Governor said it was going to happen if we voted to LEAVE......
The latest poll showed 49% want a hard Brexit. I am convinced there has been a move to leave and expect that will accelerate as more people get to know Theresa May and trust her
I voted Remain and favour Hard Brexit now. I always have thought the EEA/EFTA was the worst of both worlds.
Agreed......I wouldn't want to be a subsidiary member of the EU if we allow the others to set the rules for us.
If the EU exists and strengthens in the future, we will come back with the tail between our legs (much as did in the 70's). If it all falls apart, then Brexit was prescient...but Europe will be a diminished place. Heads we lose. Tails we lose.
The EU needs to get its head around the consent of the people. The Euro was imposed on Germans without a vote ( I accept the German constitution was an issue). I doubt seriously they would've consented. They would've been right not to, and Europe would be a happier if looser place now.
The EU is desperate to avoid giving the UK 100% free trade without 100% free movement, largely because it fears there would be a long queue of countries demanding the same. In other words it knows freedom of movement isn't at all popular, but trivial matters like what the people want are not allowed to get in the way of the Project of ever closer union. The Project has a one way ratchet and the will of the people will not be permitted to ever turn the ratchet back.
If they could solve that one I might consider rejoining. Till then I won't.
Anyone who wants a good understanding of UK government policy on Brexit and the Economy should watch/listen to this half hour Bloomberg interview with CoE Philip Hammond.
The EU is desperate to avoid giving the UK 100% free trade without 100% free movement, largely because it fears there would be a long queue of countries demanding the same. In other words it knows freedom of movement isn't at all popular, but trivial matters like what the people want are not allowed to get in the way of the Project of ever closer union. The Project has a one way ratchet and the will of the people will not be permitted to ever turn the ratchet back.
The big mistake was not anticipating the effect of freedom of movement after the A8/10 accession. It should have been predicted based on what happened when Germany was reunified, and a much longer phase in should have been mandated - not left up to individual countries to waive if they thought they'd like some more cheap labour, as we did.
Between countries with comparable economies freedom of movement was never an issue as the fundamentals meant there was no reason the net numbers would ever reach a level that would cause issues.
It seems to me that Cameron, Corbyn and Farron all do not understand the country they seek (or sought) to govern. Whether May does we shall see.
So far, she seems to be the only one who seems to have some inkling that there are very many voters who do not accept the assumptions and the political realities which have been the default for so long.
The difference between understanding the 52% and the 48% is critical, but a very small one.
Do the Brexiteers understand the 48% any more than Cameron understand the 52%?
A large part of the 48% were frightened into voting through project fear and as time goes on they are going to feel that they were duped. At one point I feared an interest rate rise because the Governor said it was going to happen if we voted to LEAVE......
The latest poll showed 49% want a hard Brexit. I am convinced there has been a move to leave and expect that will accelerate as more people get to know Theresa May and trust her
Theresa May will go down, and I don't say this pejoratively, as the first western leader to adopt the political philosophy of Putinism.
Ohmyword. Go to bed.
I mean it: National before global, a strong state, tough on oligarchs if they don't support the national interest, respectful of the patriotism of the average citizen, belief in borders (well perhaps with less willingness to move them...).
That's a rather generous assessment of Putin.
A generous assessment is possible, hence why he still commands strong support in the parts of Russia that might very loosely be compared with the parts of the UK that voted for Brexit.
On topic: I doubt if Sir Keir will make much impact, frankly, but it's a good opportunity for him to show that he can hack it as a politician. So far his reputation far exceeds his parliamentary attainments. The more significant appointment is of course Ms Abbott. What fun for the media.
On Theresa May, it is of course very unlikely that she will be as good a PM as Cameron was; we've only had two of that calibre in the last half century, and we would be very lucky to have another immediately succeeding him. She's got off to a reasonable start, and is a grown-up, which is just as well given the immense challenges, but her conference speech, and her bizarre emphasis on a half-baked grammar school policy, do not entirely inspire confidence. The pessimistic view is that she is unaware of the limitations of what she can achieve by prime ministerial diktat; if that is the case, she will fail badly. There is an alternative explanation, which is that she is being very smart, and is coming out with populist soundbites to give herself cover for unpopular decisions, such as on Heathrow and implementation of spending cuts and/or tax increases to cover the expected loss of tax revenue from the Brexit fallout. We'll have to wait and see which it is, but for the moment she's the only serious player left standing in (non-Scottish) UK politics, so it's somewhat academic.
@britainelects: UKIP GAIN Headland & Harbour (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Blimey
Very blimey, if you know that area. Been there several times birding. If Labour are losing areas like that, then they are fooooked.
It's ok, Justin124 will be around soon to explain why this has only been a Labour council seat since 1608; so nothing to worry about for a pending Labour landslide.
@britainelects: UKIP GAIN Headland & Harbour (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Blimey
Very blimey, if you know that area. Been there several times birding. If Labour are losing areas like that, then they are fooooked.
It's ok, Justin124 will be around soon to explain why this has only been a Labour council seat since 1608; so nothing to worry about for a pending Labour landslide.
@britainelects: UKIP GAIN Headland & Harbour (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Blimey
Very blimey, if you know that area. Been there several times birding. If Labour are losing areas like that, then they are fooooked.
It's ok, Justin124 will be around soon to explain why this has only been a Labour council seat since 1608; so nothing to worry about for a pending Labour landslide.
UKIP actually stood in the ward for the first time in May, beating Labour by 619 to 617. 49% is an impressive share, though, probably UKIP's best result in a by-election this year.
@britainelects: UKIP GAIN Headland & Harbour (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Blimey
Very blimey, if you know that area. Been there several times birding. If Labour are losing areas like that, then they are fooooked.
It's ok, Justin124 will be around soon to explain why this has only been a Labour council seat since 1608; so nothing to worry about for a pending Labour landslide.
UKIP actually stood in the ward for the first time in May, beating Labour by 619 to 617. 49% is an impressive share, though, probably UKIP's best result in a by-election this year.
Labour's share is still down 20 points compared to that occasion.
The EU is desperate to avoid giving the UK 100% free trade without 100% free movement, largely because it fears there would be a long queue of countries demanding the same. In other words it knows freedom of movement isn't at all popular, but trivial matters like what the people want are not allowed to get in the way of the Project of ever closer union. The Project has a one way ratchet and the will of the people will not be permitted to ever turn the ratchet back.
The big mistake was not anticipating the effect of freedom of movement after the A8/10 accession. It should have been predicted based on what happened when Germany was reunified, and a much longer phase in should have been mandated - not left up to individual countries to waive if they thought they'd like some more cheap labour, as we did.
Between countries with comparable economies freedom of movement was never an issue as the fundamentals meant there was no reason the net numbers would ever reach a level that would cause issues.
Totally agree. Essentially we (Cameron) went to the EU and said "we've got 12.5% of the EU population but are getting 40% of the migration. Bit of an issue: can we have a tweak to the rules please?" To which the answer was "Foxtrot Oscar. It's a principle".
Introducing untrammelled migration from countries with average wages of around 3000 euros p.a. was always going to cause a huge inflow. Brexit has many many layers built up since 1975 ( or even before), but that decision to allow E European free access was undoubtedly the single biggest cause of Brexit.
I think a case can be made that the most stupid people in Britain live in Hartlepool. They hang a monkey as a French spy, they elect Peter Mandelson as their MP, and they vote UKIP on a day when the party literally fights itself.
Anyone who wants a good understanding of UK government policy on Brexit and the Economy should watch/listen to this half hour Bloomberg interview with CoE Philip Hammond.
Philip Hammond is a genius in a way. He is so boring that no-one challenges him when he talks total cobblers, as on Euro clearing in that interview. With anyone else,the interviewer would interject, "Hang on a minute ..."
I think a case can be made that the most stupid people in Britain live in Hartlepool. They hang a monkey as a French spy, they elect Peter Mandelson as their MP, and they vote UKIP on a day when the party literally fights itself.
The EU is desperate to avoid giving the UK 100% free trade without 100% free movement, largely because it fears there would be a long queue of countries demanding the same. In other words it knows freedom of movement isn't at all popular, but trivial matters like what the people want are not allowed to get in the way of the Project of ever closer union. The Project has a one way ratchet and the will of the people will not be permitted to ever turn the ratchet back.
The big mistake was not anticipating the effect of freedom of movement after the A8/10 accession. It should have been predicted based on what happened when Germany was reunified, and a much longer phase in should have been mandated - not left up to individual countries to waive if they thought they'd like some more cheap labour, as we did.
Between countries with comparable economies freedom of movement was never an issue as the fundamentals meant there was no reason the net numbers would ever reach a level that would cause issues.
Totally agree. Essentially we (Cameron) went to the EU and said "we've got 12.5% of the EU population but are getting 40% of the migration. Bit of an issue: can we have a tweak to the rules please?" To which the answer was "Foxtrot Oscar. It's a principle".
Introducing untrammelled migration from countries with average wages of around 3000 euros p.a. was always going to cause a huge inflow. Brexit has many many layers built up since 1975 ( or even before), but that decision to allow E European free access was undoubtedly the single biggest cause of Brexit.
EU nations with high unemployment viewed us as their safety valve.
@britainelects: UKIP GAIN Headland & Harbour (Hartlepool) from Labour.
Blimey
Very blimey, if you know that area. Been there several times birding. If Labour are losing areas like that, then they are fooooked.
It's ok, Justin124 will be around soon to explain why this has only been a Labour council seat since 1608; so nothing to worry about for a pending Labour landslide.
UKIP actually stood in the ward for the first time in May, beating Labour by 619 to 617. 49% is an impressive share, though, probably UKIP's best result in a by-election this year.
Oh, yes, there are two seats in the ward. Both kippers now.
I think a case can be made that the most stupid people in Britain live in Hartlepool. They hang a monkey as a French spy, they elect Peter Mandelson as their MP, and they vote UKIP on a day when the party literally fights itself.
Not only that, but they put guacamole on their chips. I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.
I think a case can be made that the most stupid people in Britain live in Hartlepool. They hang a monkey as a French spy, they elect Peter Mandelson as their MP, and they vote UKIP on a day when the party literally fights itself.
Most people won't have been aware of the news from Strasbourg when voting.
Setting aside all the other guff, Cameron lost a nation-changing, history-changing referendum which he called, on his terms, on his timing, with his question, based on his renegotiation, and where he had the entire Establishment lined up behind him.
So favourable were the conditions, you yourself predicted he would win "70/30".
He lost.
There is simply no way you can call him a success, unless you bend the meaning of the word "success" to include the concept "did pretty well for while until he utterly utterly failed". Which is like saying "X was a good driver, apart from that time he needlessly drove his family into a ditch, killing them all."
Come on now. This is PB. Admit you were wrong about your hero. It happens to us all.
Of course, things didn't turn out as he expected, for lots of reasons. That's life. But it was an entirely honourable failure; he pledged to give hold the referendum, did so as he had promised without trying to weasel out of it, fought extremely hard for what he thought was the right decision, and retired gracefully when it went the other way. All politicians eventually lose - was Attlee a failure because he got booted out in an election? (Personally I think Attlee was a failure for what he did whilst he was in power, but you get the point).
So the Damian McBride thing was a wind-up, then? Yours, or someone else's?
It wasn't a wind up, it was being genuinely mooted by several journalists this evening, one of whom texted me it.
There's a big difference between someone who had served their punishment getting a job inside Downing Street as a good guy, and someone who was fired for being a complete scumbag lowlife *inside* Downing Street.
Half of Fleet St. would make "Mr" McBride the story from the day he was appointed, if Corbyn was that stupid. Although it's fair to say he's been that stupid before, several times in fact.
I think a case can be made that the most stupid people in Britain live in Hartlepool. They hang a monkey as a French spy, they elect Peter Mandelson as their MP, and they vote UKIP on a day when the party literally fights itself.
Most people won't have been aware of the news from Strasbourg when voting.
But it's useful for my theory that the UKIP vote is immovable.
And then he lost. That makes him a shit politician, and a political failure. As any sane person will agree, and this is how he is now regarded across Europe.
All political careers end in failure, as a famous chap said. That doesn't alter the fact the Cameron's premiership was extremely good for the country - the best, bar Maggie, in half a century. It will look even better in a few years' time, when people are able to look at it more objectively and compare it with what came before, and (I anticipate) after.
The EU is desperate to avoid giving the UK 100% free trade without 100% free movement, largely because it fears there would be a long queue of countries demanding the same. In other words it knows freedom of movement isn't at all popular, but trivial matters like what the people want are not allowed to get in the way of the Project of ever closer union. The Project has a one way ratchet and the will of the people will not be permitted to ever turn the ratchet back.
The big mistake was not anticipating the effect of freedom of movement after the A8/10 accession. It should have been predicted based on what happened when Germany was reunified, and a much longer phase in should have been mandated - not left up to individual countries to waive if they thought they'd like some more cheap labour, as we did.
Between countries with comparable economies freedom of movement was never an issue as the fundamentals meant there was no reason the net numbers would ever reach a level that would cause issues.
Totally agree. Essentially we (Cameron) went to the EU and said "we've got 12.5% of the EU population but are getting 40% of the migration. Bit of an issue: can we have a tweak to the rules please?" To which the answer was "Foxtrot Oscar. It's a principle".
Cameron should have said he wanted to retrospectively apply the 7 year grace period that Blair waived, but he didn't ask. It was that period when we were out on a limb that set up continuing pull factors (family reunions, local shops etc) than wouldn't have been there if we'd only opened up at the same time as the rest of the big economies.
Incidentally, it just occurred to me that that decision was made around the same time as the Euro debate was at its peak when there was lots of talk of optimum currency areas, and opponents of the Euro liked to say that it couldn't work because there isn't enough labour mobility. Perhaps that goes some way to explaining why the UK government didn't realise they were making a historic mistake.
Cameron should have said he wanted to retrospectively apply the 7 year grace period that Blair waived, but he didn't ask. It was that period when we were out on a limb that set up continuing pull factors (family reunions, local shops etc) than wouldn't have been there if we'd only opened up at the same time as the rest of the big economies.
Incidentally, it just occurred to me that that decision was made around the same time as the Euro debate was at its peak when there was lots of talk of optimum currency areas, and opponents of the Euro liked to say that it couldn't work because there isn't enough labour mobility. Perhaps that goes some way to explaining why the UK government didn't realise they were making a historic mistake.
Even if we'd only opened at the same time there would still be many pull factors. We speak English the lingua franca of the 21st century. We are a wealthy and developed economy. We have full employment and job vacancies available. We are growing.
It simply makes socioeconomic sense to migrate to Britain we are a great nation to move to and there's no shame in that!
And then he lost. That makes him a shit politician, and a political failure. As any sane person will agree, and this is how he is now regarded across Europe.
All political careers end in failure, as a famous chap said. That doesn't alter the fact the Cameron's premiership was extremely good for the country - the best, bar Maggie, in half a century. It will look even better in a few years' time, when people are able to look at it more objectively and compare it with what came before, and (I anticipate) after.
Major's was better, in every way, and didn't end in total reversal and personal disaster. Major just lost an election. Cameron had to leave midterm after 18 months in office because he completely fucked up - in his terms - the biggest vote in postwar British history.
Stop, Richard. Just stop. Enough. Cameron turned out to be a mediocre failure with one sad footnote in history to his name.
You hoped for much more. So it goes. That's life.
Major! LOL!
John Major is a nice chap, and didn't too badly in the circumstances I suppose, but his government was a series of stumbles from one disaster to another. There was hardly a single success, except perhaps Ken Clarke as Chancellor. And you can hardly claim 1997 as an electoral vindication. You really are desperate if you are citing Major as a counter-example to my claim.
Cameron should have said he wanted to retrospectively apply the 7 year grace period that Blair waived, but he didn't ask. It was that period when we were out on a limb that set up continuing pull factors (family reunions, local shops etc) than wouldn't have been there if we'd only opened up at the same time as the rest of the big economies.
Incidentally, it just occurred to me that that decision was made around the same time as the Euro debate was at its peak when there was lots of talk of optimum currency areas, and opponents of the Euro liked to say that it couldn't work because there isn't enough labour mobility. Perhaps that goes some way to explaining why the UK government didn't realise they were making a historic mistake.
Even if we'd only opened at the same time there would still be many pull factors. We speak English the lingua franca of the 21st century. We are a wealthy and developed economy. We have full employment and job vacancies available. We are growing.
Sure but my point is that even migration to the UK from Eastern Europe post-2011 was higher than it would have been if we hadn't allowed free movement from 2004.
Just looking at those dates makes it clear how different things would have been if we'd just implemented the controls that were there to be used.
When it came to his "deal" Cameron fucked up, heroically. That's all there is to it. This is no doubt why it was originally received "in stony silence" in his own Cabinet, according to The Times. His own ministers sensed it was shit. And that it might lose.
If Cameron had read the comments here between January and June (and not the thread headers, which were invariably just an opportunity for the Remainers to troll the loser-Leavers...) then he would have seen, laid out with clarity and lucidity, where his approach to the Renegotiation and then the Referendum campaign was going disastrously wrong.
Kind of ironic he was so adrift, given that the Prime Minister made the biggest political bet of our times. But then, unlike here, Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing, even in the wee small hours after the results started coming in.
Kind of ironic he was so adrift, given that the Prime Minister made the biggest political bet of our times. But then, unlike here, Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing, even in the wee small hours after the results started coming in.
That argument might have a smidgen of force were it not for the fact that nearly all well-informed Leavers - including virtually all Leavers here on PB - also thought Remain would win. The re-writing of history is quite extraordinary. If 'Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing', then he was no different from almost everyone on the Leave side.
Kind of ironic he was so adrift, given that the Prime Minister made the biggest political bet of our times. But then, unlike here, Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing, even in the wee small hours after the results started coming in.
That argument might have a smidgen of force were it not for the fact that nearly all well-informed Leavers - including virtually all Leavers here on PB - also thought Remain would win. The re-writing of history is quite extraordinary. If 'Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing', then he was no different from almost everyone on the Leave side.
Most of us Leavers thought that having the whole of the Establishment against us was too much to overcome. (From memory I think my competition entry here was that Leave would just lose, getting c.48.5%.)
But when you read the reactions of those inside the Remain campaign, and their gradual dawning that things were going horribly wrong, then they were invariably at least a month or more behind the curve here. That's not rewriting history, that is on the record, over multiple threads. Go back and read it if you doubt me.
Kind of ironic he was so adrift, given that the Prime Minister made the biggest political bet of our times. But then, unlike here, Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing, even in the wee small hours after the results started coming in.
That argument might have a smidgen of force were it not for the fact that nearly all well-informed Leavers - including virtually all Leavers here on PB - also thought Remain would win. The re-writing of history is quite extraordinary. If 'Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing', then he was no different from almost everyone on the Leave side.
Most of us Leavers thought that having the whole of the Establishment against us was too much to overcome. (From memory I think my competition entry here was that Leave would just lose, getting c.48.5%.)
But when you read the reactions of those inside the Remain campaign, and their gradual dawning that things were going horribly wrong, then they were invariably at least a month or more behind the curve here. That's not rewriting history, that is on the record, over multiple threads. Go back and read it if you doubt me.
I am instinctively pessimistic about elections, and had come to partly believe the endless rubbishing of internet polls which showed Leave doing well.
But when you read the reactions of those inside the Remain campaign, and their gradual dawning that things were going horribly wrong, then they were invariably at least a month or more behind the curve here. That's not rewriting history, that is on the record, over multiple threads. Go back and read it if you doubt me.
I've no idea how you think you know what those inside the Remain campaign thought, unless you've got contacts which I haven't got. All I know is that most people - from both sides - initially thought Remain would win easily, and that on the day before the referendum most people - from both sides - thought it had narrowed but that Remain would probably just make it. It's a myth that there was some special insight from the Leave side.
But when you read the reactions of those inside the Remain campaign, and their gradual dawning that things were going horribly wrong, then they were invariably at least a month or more behind the curve here. That's not rewriting history, that is on the record, over multiple threads. Go back and read it if you doubt me.
I've no idea how you think you know what those inside the Remain campaign thought, unless you've got contacts which I haven't got. All I know is that most people - from both sides - initially thought Remain would win easily, and that on the day before the referendum most people - from both sides - thought it had narrowed but that Remain would probably just make it. It's a myth that there was some special insight from the Leave side.
Er...try reading the books and articles that have come out since!
But let's start with the instant assessment here - that the Renegotiation was woeful. A Renegotiation you tried to convince us - at length - was a magnificent piece of brinkmanship that had delivered a splendid document.
So splendid, it was never mentioned again by Cameron in the Referendum campaign.
I am instinctively pessimistic about elections, and had come to partly believe the endless rubbishing of internet polls which showed Leave doing well.
The difference between the internet and phone polls was very stark for quite a long time, and they couldn't both be right. There was no real way of telling which was more accurate, but there was a plausible explanation for why the internet polls might have been over-stating Leave, namely self-select bias because of greater enthusiasm on the Leave side. I remember posting that that was an untested hypothesis. Looks like it was wrong, in retrospect.
Diane Abbott is the worst. What is Corbyn thinking? He's alienated a potentially more electable lefty successor in Clive Lewis, promoting highly divisive/useless types like Abbott - what is the purpose?
I think we will eventually see a rift develop between true Corbynistas and McDonnellites, who while being hard left are also enticed by the thought of actual power, and willing to do what needs to be done to get it. Clive Lewis is clearly Red Tory Scum now in Corbynista eyes, but if John McDonnell plays his cards right I could easily see him taking over before 2020 with the grudging support of the PLP.
But let's start with the instant assessment here - that the Renegotiation was woeful. A Renegotiation you tried to convince us - at length - was a magnificent piece of brinkmanship that had delivered a splendid document.
No I didn't. I said (rightly, I believe) that it was the best deal attainable overall; a bit better on protecting the City than I had expected, and a bit worse on benefits for migrants than I had expected.
On the other side, Leavers here somehow managed to convince each other that Leave would mean an EEA-style deal. For some strange reason, I can't think why, they now seem to have forgotten that I was entirely right to rubbish that fantasy.
Kind of ironic he was so adrift, given that the Prime Minister made the biggest political bet of our times. But then, unlike here, Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing, even in the wee small hours after the results started coming in.
That argument might have a smidgen of force were it not for the fact that nearly all well-informed Leavers - including virtually all Leavers here on PB - also thought Remain would win. The re-writing of history is quite extraordinary. If 'Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing', then he was no different from almost everyone on the Leave side.
Most of us Leavers thought that having the whole of the Establishment against us was too much to overcome. (From memory I think my competition entry here was that Leave would just lose, getting c.48.5%.)
But when you read the reactions of those inside the Remain campaign, and their gradual dawning that things were going horribly wrong, then they were invariably at least a month or more behind the curve here. That's not rewriting history, that is on the record, over multiple threads. Go back and read it if you doubt me.
It is inarguably true that PB Leavers judged the campaign better. We said that Obama's remarks would backfire: they did. We said that the Punishment Budget was an error: it was. And so on.
I knew the Obama remarks had backfired straightaway when members of my instinctively remain family started swerving towards leave because of it and were not at all happy with Obama or Cameron. Perception is reality and regardless of the validity of his remarks, they didn't go down well amongst people generally. I think the punishment budget was late enough in the day that it blurred into the myriad of stories and not so sure it did much damage either way.
Paddy Obama's comments were so ill judged it was incredible. If he had just come over and said well this is a big important decision and I don't want to get involved but one should carefully consider all the issues, I might have been positive for remain.
"Back of the queue" was just a red rag to a bull stuff and shows how little he / his team understood the British and current climate. It was just asking for a "Go f##k yourself" response.
I think it's unlikely Labour will go below 25% because of solid support in the metropolitan centres. Their vote was up in Haringey tonight for example. But their showing in the suburban marginals could be dire.
Jesus, what happened then! Sterling just fell through the floor. Real, or an artefact of some kind?
Very big drop against dollar and euro.
Against Euro, dropped from 1.13 to 1.08 and has now "recovered" to 1.11.
Imports are about 20% of the economy, and we have seen a drop since the referendum of over 20% in sterling so we have a "hit" of 4%+ in inflation coming down the line.
Consequences include reduced real wages, squeeze on consumption, and higher interest rates.
Diane Abbott is the worst. What is Corbyn thinking? He's alienated a potentially more electable lefty successor in Clive Lewis, promoting highly divisive/useless types like Abbott - what is the purpose?
I think we will eventually see a rift develop between true Corbynistas and McDonnellites, who while being hard left are also enticed by the thought of actual power, and willing to do what needs to be done to get it. Clive Lewis is clearly Red Tory Scum now in Corbynista eyes, but if John McDonnell plays his cards right I could easily see him taking over before 2020 with the grudging support of the PLP.
Increasingly, Labour internal politics sounds like the boring family feuds of a tiny groupuscule of extremists, and that is where they are headed. For extremism, obscurity, and total, annihilating electoral defeat.
After this reshuffle, I can now see them hitting 15-20% at the next election.
Still, I cheer myself by looking at my 20/1 on Kier Starmer being next Labour leader. you never know; brains over lefty in-fighting.
Paddy Obama's comments were so ill judged it was incredible. If he had just come over and said well this is a big important decision and I don't want to get involved but one should carefully consider all the issues, I might have been positive for remain.
"Back of the queue" was just a red rag to a bull stuff and shows how little he / his team understood the British and current climate. It was just asking for a "Go f##k yourself" response.
Indeed, as a remainer I thought it was entirely the wrong thing to say, if it had been President Trump telling us to vote Brexit and make Britain great again, I would have thought "go f##k yourself", so it's understandable!
I was in the local pub tonight, chatting, as you do. No one had heard the news of Dianne Abbot being new Shadow Home Sec. Reaction was one almighty wtf.
I remember the Headland and Harbour area of Hartlepool from the 2004 Byelection campaign. Much of it is very pleasent and pretty. As an aside radical devolution is a solution to some of these divisions. Let Haringey and Hartlepool run more and more stuff themselves.
Jesus, what happened then! Sterling just fell through the floor. Real, or an artefact of some kind?
Are you being facetious? Since Theresa Dumbfuck Milliband May decided that the most pressing thing facing the UK was grammar schools, spending money without raising it and - oh, hard Brexiting - on Sunday, the pound has dropped continuously. I assume everybody has now read Hammond's response and has worked out that the UK is run by cretins and that the pound has no bottom.
Pause
Do you think I'm swearing enough? It's just I'm not sure I'm giving the situation enough weight.
Jesus, what happened then! Sterling just fell through the floor. Real, or an artefact of some kind?
My god. You're not wrong. It just dropped 3 cents in a matter of half an hour!
Any chance it's to do with Philip Hammond's speeches to finance firms/wall street today - I haven't followed it, but maybe it wasn't too reassuring?!
It would be the first time Philip Hammond was ever EXCITiNG
To my mind, we need to get used to this. The British economy is entering a period of extreme turbulence. Some of it will be exhilarating, some of it will be nightmarish. We are exiting the EU. Buckle up.
It could be insurance companies preparing for Hurricane Matthew ahead of it's impact on Friday, moving large amounts of capital to the USA.
Comments
:O
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_general_election,_2018#Poll_results
The EU is desperate to avoid giving the UK 100% free trade without 100% free movement, largely because it fears there would be a long queue of countries demanding the same. In other words it knows freedom of movement isn't at all popular, but trivial matters like what the people want are not allowed to get in the way of the Project of ever closer union. The Project has a one way ratchet and the will of the people will not be permitted to ever turn the ratchet back.
If they could solve that one I might consider rejoining. Till then I won't.
Anyone who wants a good understanding of UK government policy on Brexit and the Economy should watch/listen to this half hour Bloomberg interview with CoE Philip Hammond.
Between countries with comparable economies freedom of movement was never an issue as the fundamentals meant there was no reason the net numbers would ever reach a level that would cause issues.
And
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/784149593068040192
On Theresa May, it is of course very unlikely that she will be as good a PM as Cameron was; we've only had two of that calibre in the last half century, and we would be very lucky to have another immediately succeeding him. She's got off to a reasonable start, and is a grown-up, which is just as well given the immense challenges, but her conference speech, and her bizarre emphasis on a half-baked grammar school policy, do not entirely inspire confidence. The pessimistic view is that she is unaware of the limitations of what she can achieve by prime ministerial diktat; if that is the case, she will fail badly. There is an alternative explanation, which is that she is being very smart, and is coming out with populist soundbites to give herself cover for unpopular decisions, such as on Heathrow and implementation of spending cuts and/or tax increases to cover the expected loss of tax revenue from the Brexit fallout. We'll have to wait and see which it is, but for the moment she's the only serious player left standing in (non-Scottish) UK politics, so it's somewhat academic.
UKIP: 49.2% (+49.2)
LAB: 25.3% (-17.7)
PHF: 15.4% (-20.3)
CON: 4.1% (-14.0)
PNP: 3.6%
IND: 2.6%
http://vote-2012.proboards.com/post/421474/thread
UKIP – 496
Labour – 255
Putting Hartlepool First – 155
Conservatives – 41
Patients not profit in our NHS – 36
Ind - 26
Ahem
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/784155926249017344
EDIT: Dammit, Andy.
On a serious note, wishing a good recovery to Steven Woolfe.
the alt right here, putting peoples lives at risk
Introducing untrammelled migration from countries with average wages of around 3000 euros p.a. was always going to cause a huge inflow. Brexit has many many layers built up since 1975 ( or even before), but that decision to allow E European free access was undoubtedly the single biggest cause of Brexit.
St. Ann's, Haringey:
Lab 1177 (63.7%; +12.4)
Grn 323 (17.5%; -3.7)
LD 189 (10.2%; +3.4)
Con 106 (5.7%; -1.3)
UKIP 54 (2.9%; -3.1)
Half of Fleet St. would make "Mr" McBride the story from the day he was appointed, if Corbyn was that stupid. Although it's fair to say he's been that stupid before, several times in fact.
Incidentally, it just occurred to me that that decision was made around the same time as the Euro debate was at its peak when there was lots of talk of optimum currency areas, and opponents of the Euro liked to say that it couldn't work because there isn't enough labour mobility. Perhaps that goes some way to explaining why the UK government didn't realise they were making a historic mistake.
It simply makes socioeconomic sense to migrate to Britain we are a great nation to move to and there's no shame in that!
John Major is a nice chap, and didn't too badly in the circumstances I suppose, but his government was a series of stumbles from one disaster to another. There was hardly a single success, except perhaps Ken Clarke as Chancellor. And you can hardly claim 1997 as an electoral vindication. You really are desperate if you are citing Major as a counter-example to my claim.
Just looking at those dates makes it clear how different things would have been if we'd just implemented the controls that were there to be used.
Kind of ironic he was so adrift, given that the Prime Minister made the biggest political bet of our times. But then, unlike here, Cameron was surrounded by second raters who were incapable of seeing how the political wind was blowing, even in the wee small hours after the results started coming in.
But when you read the reactions of those inside the Remain campaign, and their gradual dawning that things were going horribly wrong, then they were invariably at least a month or more behind the curve here. That's not rewriting history, that is on the record, over multiple threads. Go back and read it if you doubt me.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/ukip
http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/05/people-are-putting-echoes-around-their-names-on-twitter-heres-why-5925002/
But let's start with the instant assessment here - that the Renegotiation was woeful. A Renegotiation you tried to convince us - at length - was a magnificent piece of brinkmanship that had delivered a splendid document.
So splendid, it was never mentioned again by Cameron in the Referendum campaign.
I think we will eventually see a rift develop between true Corbynistas and McDonnellites, who while being hard left are also enticed by the thought of actual power, and willing to do what needs to be done to get it. Clive Lewis is clearly Red Tory Scum now in Corbynista eyes, but if John McDonnell plays his cards right I could easily see him taking over before 2020 with the grudging support of the PLP.
On the other side, Leavers here somehow managed to convince each other that Leave would mean an EEA-style deal. For some strange reason, I can't think why, they now seem to have forgotten that I was entirely right to rubbish that fantasy.
"Back of the queue" was just a red rag to a bull stuff and shows how little he / his team understood the British and current climate. It was just asking for a "Go f##k yourself" response.
Imports are about 20% of the economy, and we have seen a drop since the referendum of over 20% in sterling so we have a "hit" of 4%+ in inflation coming down the line.
Consequences include reduced real wages, squeeze on consumption, and higher interest rates.
Pause
Do you think I'm swearing enough? It's just I'm not sure I'm giving the situation enough weight.
It has happened in the past.