Mr. Tyson, in the short term I do think our departure will make the EU stronger, but the fundamental divergence between reality and ideologically imposed decision-making remains.
By that, I mean the cultures, economies and demographics of the member states vary so much that single answers on an EU-wide basis often make no sense for many countries, but are demanded by the perpetual drive for ever closer integration.
In any case, it'll take two or three decades to form a preliminary view of whether or not our departure worked well (for us or the EU).
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
Yeah. People saying Obama is a useless president ignore his high favourability ratings with the American public.
His high ratings are surely a function of folks looking at who will succeed him?
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
So in your view of the modern economy the EU is digital and the rest of the world is analogue? That would explain the stunning economic success of continental Europe.
We're out of the Single Market in the same way a hotel is out of industry wide booking systems. Both cases make commercial relationships more difficult and more expensive.
There was an example in circulation before the referendum relating to starter model Jaguars and Audis/BMWs.
On the assumption of a 10% currency movement and 10% tariff, the Jaguar became the more competitively priced car both in the UK and in Europe having been the more expensive product beforehand in both markets.
Has the currency move already exceeded 10%?
That Jaguar only has around 20% of its costs denominated in Sterling, because the steel, the electricity, the tyres, the gearbox, perhaps the engine, the electronics, etc., will all have been sourced in the international supply chain.
So, a 10% change in the value of Sterling moves the cost to a Euro purchaser by 2%.
And don't forget those European cars that derive significant amounts of their value from parts made in the UK will benefit similarly. So, a French Renault that bought seats from a UK supplier has just seen the cost of these decline.
What about labour costs? Land costs? Tax and social security costs imposed by the national governments?
The UK has become infinitely cheaper and more affordable to the European (and international) buyer, whereas 'old' Europe has become more expensive and less competitive by comparison.
There was an example in circulation before the referendum relating to starter model Jaguars and Audis/BMWs.
On the assumption of a 10% currency movement and 10% tariff, the Jaguar became the more competitively priced car both in the UK and in Europe having been the more expensive product beforehand in both markets.
Has the currency move already exceeded 10%?
That Jaguar only has around 20% of its costs denominated in Sterling, because the steel, the electricity, the tyres, the gearbox, perhaps the engine, the electronics, etc., will all have been sourced in the international supply chain.
So, a 10% change in the value of Sterling moves the cost to a Euro purchaser by 2%.
And don't forget those European cars that derive significant amounts of their value from parts made in the UK will benefit similarly. So, a French Renault that bought seats from a UK supplier has just seen the cost of these decline.
What about labour costs? Land costs? Tax and social security costs imposed by the national governments?
The UK has become infinitely cheaper and more affordable to the European (and international) buyer, whereas 'old' Europe has become more expensive and less competitive by comparison.
I thought one desirable outcome of Brexit is that it will raise wages and herald the end of cheap imported labour?
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
Yeah. People saying Obama is a useless president ignore his high favourability ratings with the American public.
That's comparing different things. I'm sure you can see that.
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
I called Foyles really not so long ago. The recorded message said: "For enquiries, please send a stamped addressed envelope to Foyles, 107 Charing Cross Road..."
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
Yeah. People saying Obama is a useless president ignore his high favourability ratings with the American public.
His high ratings are surely a function of folks looking at who will succeed him?
Obama's rating are about average for an outgoing President. I'd say he was an average President.
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
So in your view of the modern economy the EU is digital and the rest of the world is analogue? That would explain the stunning economic success of continental Europe.
We're out of the Single Market in the same way a hotel is out of industry wide booking systems. Both cases make commercial relationships more difficult and more expensive.
Well, we're not out of it yet. There's a world outside Europe, most of it not in EU-like organisations, some of it doing very well economically. Within the Single Market there are several basket-cases.
Of course I accept that Single Market membership makes trade with 27 other countries easier, but that's not the only factor to consider.
MaxPB said: "Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless. Worse than useless when taking foreign policy into account. "
I suspect it may be a bit strange to outsiders, but, apart from an occasional runaway blunder, American tends to pretty well run itself. Runaway blunders happen elsewhere too. I believe Obama (and his family) has been a good president and a model of decency.
There was an example in circulation before the referendum relating to starter model Jaguars and Audis/BMWs.
On the assumption of a 10% currency movement and 10% tariff, the Jaguar became the more competitively priced car both in the UK and in Europe having been the more expensive product beforehand in both markets.
Has the currency move already exceeded 10%?
That Jaguar only has around 20% of its costs denominated in Sterling, because the steel, the electricity, the tyres, the gearbox, perhaps the engine, the electronics, etc., will all have been sourced in the international supply chain.
So, a 10% change in the value of Sterling moves the cost to a Euro purchaser by 2%.
And don't forget those European cars that derive significant amounts of their value from parts made in the UK will benefit similarly. So, a French Renault that bought seats from a UK supplier has just seen the cost of these decline.
What about labour costs? Land costs? Tax and social security costs imposed by the national governments?
The UK has become infinitely cheaper and more affordable to the European (and international) buyer, whereas 'old' Europe has become more expensive and less competitive by comparison.
That's easy enough to work out. The Sunderland Nissan plant produces 500,000 vehicles a year, and and employees 6,700 people. Let's assume the average wage is 40k. So, the annual wage bill is 268m. So, that means that the total wage bill per car is about 536 quid. A 10% fall in the price of sterling knocks 54 pounds off the production cost of a 20,000 pound Qashqai.
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
So in your view of the modern economy the EU is digital and the rest of the world is analogue? That would explain the stunning economic success of continental Europe.
We're out of the Single Market in the same way a hotel is out of industry wide booking systems. Both cases make commercial relationships more difficult and more expensive.
Sorry for the double post, but to labour the hotel analogy somewhat, being in the EU/Single Market is more like being part of a chain; some economies of scale (bulk buying/customs union) but some bureaucratic problems and restraints (cack-handed corporate management/Single Market regulation). As part of a chain or as an independent hotel you can be on modern online booking systems if you so choose (signing trade deals) but have more control over that as an independent.
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
Yeah. People saying Obama is a useless president ignore his high favourability ratings with the American public.
His high ratings are surely a function of folks looking at who will succeed him?
That's an interesting and astute point. His ratings weren't so hot a year ago before the race to succeed him kicked off in earnest. It's not really been a great 21st century for presidents so far, has it? By contrast, the last two centuries had each produced by this stage an entry for Mount Rushmore.
Obama's rating are about average for an outgoing President. I'd say he was an average President.
Obama looks good compared to his predecessor and possible successors, but given that they are W, and Hilary or Trump that's not exactly surprising. Average is about right, Hope and Change didn't amount to a hell of a lot in the end.
I wonder whether the fog is starting to lift in the heads of the useful idiots and they are beginning to see just how badly they were had? It's all too late now of course.
It's hard to see now how we don't end up with hard Brexit (better described as car crash Brexit). The alternative requires a screeching handbrake turn from the Prime Minister that would destroy her credibility or a screeching handbrake turn from the EU that would destroy the credibility of numerous senior politicians across the EU. The former is slightly more likely than the latter, but neither seems remotely likely to me.
Your de haute en bas condescension worked so persuasively (along with the REMAIN campaign in general) during the referendum one wonders at you continuing to deploy it....
Are these the same 'useful idiots' who predicted economic calamity and factory closures if we didn't join the Euro, and when that didn't happen, again promised economic calamity and factory closures if we leave the EU?
The only handbrake turns so far are from those who predicted an Immediate shock and recession if we had the temerity even to vote to leave.....
I think most commentary at the time was that it was working class voters who would be the "useful idiots", duped by economically liberal Leave campaigners.
I think most of us thought that if Leave won, either Johnson or Gove would take over. We hadn't factored in their destroying each other. Nor had we considered that Theresa May would so clearly welcome a Leave vote.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
I called Foyles really not so long ago. The recorded message said: "For enquiries, please send a stamped addressed envelope to Foyles, 107 Charing Cross Road..."
Foyles still living in the 1950's as the world moves on...
Do they still have that really antiquated way of paying for books (buying a chit at one counter, then handing it over at another?) Not to mention that the way the books were kept on the upper floors was a disgrace.
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
So in your view of the modern economy the EU is digital and the rest of the world is analogue? That would explain the stunning economic success of continental Europe.
We're out of the Single Market in the same way a hotel is out of industry wide booking systems. Both cases make commercial relationships more difficult and more expensive.
Well, we're not out of it yet. There's a world outside Europe, most of it not in EU-like organisations, some of it doing very well economically. Within the Single Market there are several basket-cases.
Of course I accept that Single Market membership makes trade with 27 other countries easier, but that's not the only factor to consider.
It is almost certainly true that leaving the single market and customs union will result in a net increase in UK trading barriers to the EU 27*, compared to what we have now, because exports will subsequently deal with clearing EU customs hurdles, we will no longer be part of a single regulatory regime (having to demonstrate compliance instead) and services may not be able to seemlessly be offered across the UK/EU border.
Where Remainers and Leavers usually differ is in how much of a big deal this is in the medium-long term, both generally concede short-term disruption.
On the credit side, it will also allow the UK to establish its own regulatory regime, pursue its own trade agreements, and have full democratic control of all domestic policy, which may enhance democracy at home and allow us to respond more flexibly and quickly to global events in future.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
5...4...3...2....1....Justin124 tells us due to a byelection in Derby in 1949, it isn't that bad for Labour.
Mr. 1000, a time-limited EEA membership is an interesting idea.
Kicking the can down the road is a cop-out too far.
Were you a business person, would you invest in capacity in the UK, or would you choose somewhere else where you knew the answer to most of those questions?
So if you own a hotel you should never close for refurbishments which would improve your longer term prospects as you might have a short period of reduced room capacity ?
I don't think that's the correct analogy. It's more like a hotel removing themselves from online booking sites and requiring potential customers to send their bookings by post accompanied by a cheque and charging a fee to do so.
The risk is that customers will say, sod that, we'll go somewhere else.
So in your view of the modern economy the EU is digital and the rest of the world is analogue? That would explain the stunning economic success of continental Europe.
We're out of the Single Market in the same way a hotel is out of industry wide booking systems. Both cases make commercial relationships more difficult and more expensive.
Well, we're not out of it yet. There's a world outside Europe, most of it not in EU-like organisations, some of it doing very well economically. Within the Single Market there are several basket-cases.
Of course I accept that Single Market membership makes trade with 27 other countries easier, but that's not the only factor to consider.
It is almost certainly true that leaving the single market and customs union will result in a net increase in UK trading barriers to the EU 27*, compared to what we have now, because exports will subsequently deal with clearing EU customs hurdles, we will no longer be part of a single regulatory regime (having to demonstrate compliance instead) and services may not be able to seemlessly be offered across the UK/EU border.
Where Remainers and Leavers usually differ is in how much of a big deal this is in the medium-long term, both generally concede short-term disruption.
On the credit side, it will also allow the UK to establish its own regulatory regime, pursue its own trade agreements, and have full democratic control of all domestic policy, which may enhance democracy at home and allow us to respond more flexibly and quickly to global events in future.
Not another post about effing Brexit? Give it a rest will you?
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
At presidential level, yes. At a Congressional level, the GOP has won six of the eight House elections this century (by seats; five if counted by votes).
This is what is wrong with Hillary's campaign. Trump has a message that can resonate atleast superficially: A month away from the election, she still seems to have no big vision for America. She has plenty of policy ideas, sure, tweaks here and there to what we’re doing now, but she is insistent that the country is moving generally in the right direction. Also, she loves kids. That’s not a message, and neither is “Stronger Together.” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-who-won-the-second-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
At presidential level, yes. At a Congressional level, the GOP has won six of the eight House elections this century (by seats; five if counted by votes).
Even in 2012, the Republicans were only 1% behind the Democrats in terms of votes for the House (unopposed returns mean the real gap was probably about 0.5%).
I wonder whether the fog is starting to lift in the heads of the useful idiots and they are beginning to see just how badly they were had? It's all too late now of course.
It's hard to see now how we don't end up with hard Brexit (better described as car crash Brexit). The alternative requires a screeching handbrake turn from the Prime Minister that would destroy her credibility or a screeching handbrake turn from the EU that would destroy the credibility of numerous senior politicians across the EU. The former is slightly more likely than the latter, but neither seems remotely likely to me.
Your de haute en bas condescension worked so persuasively (along with the REMAIN campaign in general) during the referendum one wonders at you continuing to deploy it....
Are these the same 'useful idiots' who predicted economic calamity and factory closures if we didn't join the Euro, and when that didn't happen, again promised economic calamity and factory closures if we leave the EU?
The only handbrake turns so far are from those who predicted an Immediate shock and recession if we had the temerity even to vote to leave.....
I think most commentary at the time was that it was working class voters who would be the "useful idiots", duped by economically liberal Leave campaigners.
Looks like it was the 'economically liberal Leave campaigners' who were the 'useful idiots' as Mrs May prepares to deliver the working class voters what they want...
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
God, the Lib Dems are shite. You'd think that they would at least try and appeal to centrist Con voters not enthused by TMay's apparent love of big state intervention. Just fucking shut the party down, time for a mercy killing so at least the old Liberal Party could make a comeback.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
God, the Lib Dems are shite. You'd think that they would at least try and appeal to centrist Con voters not enthused by TMay's apparent love of big state intervention. Just fucking shut the party down, time for a mercy killing so at least the old Liberal Party could make a comeback.
I think Tony might be about to launch a new Party for Con lefties and Lab righties!
I wonder whether the fog is starting to lift in the heads of the useful idiots and they are beginning to see just how badly they were had? It's all too late now of course.
It's hard to see now how we don't end up with hard Brexit (better described as car crash Brexit). The alternative requires a screeching handbrake turn from the Prime Minister that would destroy her credibility or a screeching handbrake turn from the EU that would destroy the credibility of numerous senior politicians across the EU. The former is slightly more likely than the latter, but neither seems remotely likely to me.
Your de haute en bas condescension worked so persuasively (along with the REMAIN campaign in general) during the referendum one wonders at you continuing to deploy it....
Are these the same 'useful idiots' who predicted economic calamity and factory closures if we didn't join the Euro, and when that didn't happen, again promised economic calamity and factory closures if we leave the EU?
The only handbrake turns so far are from those who predicted an Immediate shock and recession if we had the temerity even to vote to leave.....
I think most commentary at the time was that it was working class voters who would be the "useful idiots", duped by economically liberal Leave campaigners.
Maybe a difference between Leavers who think, we had the vote, done and dusted, why are we still discussing this; and Remainers who think, we're in a mess, where do we go next?
The loudest voices right now are the enthusiastic Leavers who have become terrified by the prospect of HARD Brexit.
This is what is wrong with Hillary's campaign. Trump has a message that can resonate atleast superficially: A month away from the election, she still seems to have no big vision for America. She has plenty of policy ideas, sure, tweaks here and there to what we’re doing now, but she is insistent that the country is moving generally in the right direction. Also, she loves kids. That’s not a message, and neither is “Stronger Together.” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-who-won-the-second-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
I keep seeing a quote about Hillary's term as 8yrs Senator - three bills with her name on them - a bridge, renaming something and a post office.
I haven't seen this rebutted so far. The charge that she's all insider jargon talk/no action is hard to refute with a record like that. Hate him or just marvel how he's still a contender, Donald has one Make American Great Again.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
God, the Lib Dems are shite. You'd think that they would at least try and appeal to centrist Con voters not enthused by TMay's apparent love of big state intervention. Just fucking shut the party down, time for a mercy killing so at least the old Liberal Party could make a comeback.
I think Tony might be about to launch a new Party for Con lefties and Lab righties!
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
At presidential level, yes. At a Congressional level, the GOP has won six of the eight House elections this century (by seats; five if counted by votes).
Even in 2012, the Republicans were only 1% behind the Democrats in terms of votes for the House (unopposed returns mean the real gap was probably about 0.5%).
Isn't it 'checks and balances' combined with mid-term feelings. The Congress is the booby prize.
This is what is wrong with Hillary's campaign. Trump has a message that can resonate atleast superficially: A month away from the election, she still seems to have no big vision for America. She has plenty of policy ideas, sure, tweaks here and there to what we’re doing now, but she is insistent that the country is moving generally in the right direction. Also, she loves kids. That’s not a message, and neither is “Stronger Together.” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-who-won-the-second-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
I keep seeing a quote about Hillary's term as 8yrs Senator - three bills with her name on them - a bridge, renaming something and a post office.
I haven't seen this rebutted so far. The charge that she's all insider jargon talk/no action is hard to refute with a record like that. Hate him or just marvel how he's still a contender, Donald has one Make American Great Again.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
God, the Lib Dems are shite. You'd think that they would at least try and appeal to centrist Con voters not enthused by TMay's apparent love of big state intervention. Just fucking shut the party down, time for a mercy killing so at least the old Liberal Party could make a comeback.
I think Tony might be about to launch a new Party for Con lefties and Lab righties!
With Ed they used to say just wait until you get to know the real Ed....I am sure a significant proportion of the population still don't know what the real Jahadi Jez and McMao views are.
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
At presidential level, yes. At a Congressional level, the GOP has won six of the eight House elections this century (by seats; five if counted by votes).
That's because Dem voters are lazy voters. By failing to turn out in 2010 the Dems have been at a structural disadvantage due to redistricting. Next redistricting is in 2020, so Dems get the presidential boost which will help them.
Guardian/ICM poll gives Tories 17-point post-conference lead
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
God, the Lib Dems are shite. You'd think that they would at least try and appeal to centrist Con voters not enthused by TMay's apparent love of big state intervention. Just fucking shut the party down, time for a mercy killing so at least the old Liberal Party could make a comeback.
I think Tony might be about to launch a new Party for Con lefties and Lab righties!
Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless.
Yet has amazing favourability ratings.
I will scream demographics just now. The Republicans have won the popular vote once in the last 6 attempts. This is only going to get worse for them unless they re-align.
At presidential level, yes. At a Congressional level, the GOP has won six of the eight House elections this century (by seats; five if counted by votes).
Even in 2012, the Republicans were only 1% behind the Democrats in terms of votes for the House (unopposed returns mean the real gap was probably about 0.5%).
Isn't it 'checks and balances' combined with mid-term feelings. The Congress is the booby prize.
Well, it shows that split-ticket voting isn't quite over and done with. It probably takes a real rush of enthusiasm for a new President to hand one party all three organs of government.
WRT the Senate, it seems to me that several incumbent Republicans have built up personal votes that far outweigh the support Trump is getting in their States. Compare Trump's 3% lead in Alaska with Murkowski's 33% lead, or him being roughly level-pegging in Ohio with Portman's 14% lead.
This is what is wrong with Hillary's campaign. Trump has a message that can resonate atleast superficially: A month away from the election, she still seems to have no big vision for America. She has plenty of policy ideas, sure, tweaks here and there to what we’re doing now, but she is insistent that the country is moving generally in the right direction. Also, she loves kids. That’s not a message, and neither is “Stronger Together.” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-who-won-the-second-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
I particularly enjoyed her line when 'answering' the first question last night - "America is great when we're good" or something like that. I mean yes Hillary, but what of it?
This is what is wrong with Hillary's campaign. Trump has a message that can resonate atleast superficially: A month away from the election, she still seems to have no big vision for America. She has plenty of policy ideas, sure, tweaks here and there to what we’re doing now, but she is insistent that the country is moving generally in the right direction. Also, she loves kids. That’s not a message, and neither is “Stronger Together.” http://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-who-won-the-second-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
I particularly enjoyed her line when 'answering' the first question last night - "America is great when we're good" or something like that. I mean yes Hillary, but what of it?
Neither campaign is saying anything very much, except that the other lot are even worse.
Jesus Christ on a bike, this site has got boring. The same arguments seem to be rehashed several times everyday by the same, small number, of people.
Reminds me if the bloke who was thrown into a prison cell with 3 old lags.
Number 36 said one and the others fell about laughing.
Number 45! Howls of mirth
24! Said the third with a deep belly laugh.
"What's going on?" The new entrant asked the guard.
"They've been here so long they know each others jokes so well they've numbered them"
The new guy thought he'd join in. "Number 12!" he yelled.
Stony silence.
The guard shook his head sadly. "It's the way you tell them."
Ha! A long time ago, I worked in recruitment and as anyone familiar with the industry knows - it has a huge staff turnover. We'd sequentially allotted payroll numbers - after six yrs, I could only find about 5 others who'd worked there longer than me. We'd about 350 staff.
Price fall = €7,000 (no tariff) Price fall = €4,800 (10% tariff)
Production and material costs would have to absolutely sky-rocket to wipe out the gain to the consumer at the end.
Logistics, direct labour , admin - all billed in sterling for EU bound exports?
Raw materials? Sourced where? Replacement suppliers available?
That's 80% of the production cost of a car if I am reading correctly.
Yes, but the Qashqai has a long supply chain. So, it's tyres likely come from Michelin factories in France. So, their price in Sterling will have risen. And the steel used in the car will have be bought at the world price in US dollars. And the motor likely comes from the huge Nissan engine factory in Spain. Semiconductor content likely comes from Infineon in Germany. Sensors from AMS in Austria. Other electronics come from Continental in Germany. The seats might come from Lear's Redditch plant, or they might come from France.
The UK is not a big enough place to have a complete automotive supply chain.
So, changes in the value of Sterling can only affect that part of the value add that is in the EU UK. Which I've generously estimated at 20%, but it might easily be more like 10-15%.
EDIT: I meant UK in the last paragraph but mistyped.
A very good poll for the Tories - but be careful! Have ICM overadjusted following the May 2015 debacle.? The effect has certainly been to add several points to the Tory lead. Surprised we did not get a YouGov voting intentions poll last week.
Comments
By that, I mean the cultures, economies and demographics of the member states vary so much that single answers on an EU-wide basis often make no sense for many countries, but are demanded by the perpetual drive for ever closer integration.
In any case, it'll take two or three decades to form a preliminary view of whether or not our departure worked well (for us or the EU).
The UK has become infinitely cheaper and more affordable to the European (and international) buyer, whereas 'old' Europe has become more expensive and less competitive by comparison.
https://twitter.com/BenChu_/status/785408832986046464
https://twitter.com/BenChu_/status/785409148116725760
Of course I accept that Single Market membership makes trade with 27 other countries easier, but that's not the only factor to consider.
"Clinton offers the US nothing that Obama hasn't for 8 years and Obama has been useless. Worse than useless when taking foreign policy into account. "
I suspect it may be a bit strange to outsiders, but, apart from an occasional runaway blunder, American tends to pretty well run itself. Runaway blunders happen elsewhere too.
I believe Obama (and his family) has been a good president and a model of decency.
Remainers assuming we are all daft as usual.
Trump is promising to direct the state to imprison his political opponents.
I can’t overstate how scary this is.
Brexit secretary @DavidDavisMP will make a statement to the House this afternoon on European Communities Act 1972
I think most of us thought that if Leave won, either Johnson or Gove would take over. We hadn't factored in their destroying each other. Nor had we considered that Theresa May would so clearly welcome a Leave vote.
That would shake things up!
Political parties normally expect a modest post-conference bounce in the polls (because, if they are half-competent at PR, they can generally create a large quantity of mostly favourable media coverage) but the Conservatives will be delighted with the latest findings from the regular Guardian/ICM poll. It gives them a 17-point lead.
Here are the new figures, and how they compare to the previous Guardian/ICM polling figures from early September, before the conference season started.
Conservatives: 43% (up 2)
Labour: 26% (down 2)
Ukip: 11% (down 2)
Lib Dems: 8% (down 1)
Greens: 6% (up 2)
The fieldwork was carried out from Friday to Sunday.
The 17-point lead is the joint second highest ever recorded for the Conservatives by ICM in its polling series going back to 1992. They only once got a higher lead (20 points in June 2008, when Gordon Brown was at his most unpopular) although in September and October 2009 they also had a 17-point lead in ICM polls. But Labour did have larger polling leads at various points in the Blair era.
At 26%, the Labour figure is only one point higher than their lowest rating in ICM polling - the 25% they hit in June 2008 and August 2009.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2016/oct/10/jeremy-corbyn-labour-rehsuffle-continues-labour-reshuffle-politics-live?CMP=share_btn_tw
Where Remainers and Leavers usually differ is in how much of a big deal this is in the medium-long term, both generally concede short-term disruption.
On the credit side, it will also allow the UK to establish its own regulatory regime, pursue its own trade agreements, and have full democratic control of all domestic policy, which may enhance democracy at home and allow us to respond more flexibly and quickly to global events in future.
First post-conf Poll - Guardian/ICM:
Con 43% (+2)
Lab 26% (-2)
UKIP 11% (-2)
LD 8% (-1)
Grn 6% (+2)
Con lead 17%
Yep, May's really called this one wrong....
And of course the Real Fight Club party. Well done the Greens for providing a safe space for perplexed voters.
Martin Boon
@guardian @ICMResearch +17 Con poll lead 2nd highest ever in series. Lab on 24% w/o post field adjustments. https://t.co/axDRz1liL1
A month away from the election, she still seems to have no big vision for America. She has plenty of policy ideas, sure, tweaks here and there to what we’re doing now, but she is insistent that the country is moving generally in the right direction. Also, she loves kids. That’s not a message, and neither is “Stronger Together.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/commentary-who-won-the-second-presidential-debate-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/
The current 'progressive majority' = 26+8+6 = 40.
I haven't seen this rebutted so far. The charge that she's all insider jargon talk/no action is hard to refute with a record like that. Hate him or just marvel how he's still a contender, Donald has one Make American Great Again.
http://news.sky.com/story/over-55s-in-england-housing-wealth-worth-more-than-italian-gdp-10612037?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
http://thehill.com/opinion/juan-williams/299931-juan-williams-cuba-connection-will-cost-trump-dear
Or IDS, who you regularly compare May to?
Philip Collins Retweeted Oliver Kamm
26 per cent! Ludicrously high. I think Labour can dip further.
Blairite scum bag etc etc.
WRT the Senate, it seems to me that several incumbent Republicans have built up personal votes that far outweigh the support Trump is getting in their States. Compare Trump's 3% lead in Alaska with Murkowski's 33% lead, or him being roughly level-pegging in Ohio with Portman's 14% lead.
Number 36 said one and the others fell about laughing.
Number 45! Howls of mirth
24! Said the third with a deep belly laugh.
"What's going on?" The new entrant asked the guard.
"They've been here so long they know each others jokes so well they've numbered them"
The new guy thought he'd join in. "Number 12!" he yelled.
Stony silence.
The guard shook his head sadly. "It's the way you tell them."
£20,000 @ €1.10 (Oct) = €22,000 @ 1.10 (tariff) = €24,200
Price fall = €7,000 (no tariff)
Price fall = €4,800 (10% tariff)
Production and material costs would have to absolutely sky-rocket to wipe out the gain to the consumer at the end.
Logistics, direct labour , admin - all billed in sterling for EU bound exports?
Raw materials? Sourced where? Replacement suppliers available?
That's 80% of the production cost of a car if I am reading correctly.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2005-2010
That's the sort of score Theresa May should be aiming for. It is a decent benchmark.
Before the adjustment for 'Don't Knows/Refusers', ICM has:
Con: 45
Lab: 24
And in Scotland, Con on 25, Lab 15, SNP 46
https://www.icmunlimited.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/2016_oct1_guardian_poll.pdf
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/785441886827900928?lang=en-gb
Seems low....
https://twitter.com/DrDavidDuke/status/784966088048021504
So, it's tyres likely come from Michelin factories in France. So, their price in Sterling will have risen.
And the steel used in the car will have be bought at the world price in US dollars.
And the motor likely comes from the huge Nissan engine factory in Spain.
Semiconductor content likely comes from Infineon in Germany. Sensors from AMS in Austria.
Other electronics come from Continental in Germany.
The seats might come from Lear's Redditch plant, or they might come from France.
The UK is not a big enough place to have a complete automotive supply chain.
So, changes in the value of Sterling can only affect that part of the value add that is in the EU UK. Which I've generously estimated at 20%, but it might easily be more like 10-15%.
EDIT: I meant UK in the last paragraph but mistyped.