What a relief it must be for the PB Brexitories to take a break from whining about Project Fear 2.0 and telling every man and his dog that it wasn't about the money, but sovereignty, democratic accountability, taking back control and freedom. That they've reverted to pushing Project Fear 1.1 and telling the poor, old bloke with the collie that for Scotland it's all about the economics and an Indy Scotland would be a worse basket case than Greece is proof of the old adage that a change is as good as a rest.
To be fair, there were several leavers on here who did push the sovereignty, democratic accountability, taking back control and freedom line before the referendum. And some, generally a subset of the above, who rubbished some of leave's financial claims.
That category of leaver seems to have increased substantially in number over the last few weeks, can't think why.
Well, yes. There is a certain amount of denial amongst leavers about certain aspects of Brexit. Again, to be fair, some say they think Brexit is worth it whatever the financial costs. I don't agree with that, but at least there's some consistency there.
However, there is also some denial amongst supporters of Scottish Independence, particularly towards the financials.
(dons flameproof coat)
There was also a lot of denial on the part of those wanting to Remain in the EU. As we have seen with some comments on here the last few days their image of the EU and its direction of travel was seriously at odds with reality.
Indeed. If you recall, my position was that if we did not leave this time, we would probably have to leave eventually.
However, I don't fully agree with your statement. The UK was, to a certain extent, a brake on the ambitions of some in the EU for the organisation's future shape. Now we've left, they're freer to head in the direction they want. I know you'll disagree with this, but these noises may not have happened if we'd voted to remain. Our vote to leave might have massively accelerated EU integration. (*)
Or perhaps, they would have been emboldened by a remain vote. However I doubt that would be the case if the vote had been an equally narrow remain. A stonking remain win would have emboldened them.
But we cannot know, as there is no control experiment.
(*) And if this is the case, then they're heading for trouble. As I wrote last night, the EU project's leaders don't seem to have understood why we wanted to leave. This means they're unlikely to correct the flaws before another country votes to leave.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
"They"
? Scare quotes? I obviously mean Twitter mods.
They banned James O'Keefe yesterday for posting recordings of ballot stuffing/destroying by Democrats.
You definitely have something there Robert - but don't you think the symptom, through breaking the link between the education of natives and economic growth, also perpetuates the situation? The symptom becomes another cause, and a far more obvious one.
Pret a Manger on Picadilly, a hundred yards from where I work, has a constant sign in the window asking for new staff. They offer £11.50/hour, and extra bonuses. There's not one member of that staff that's not European. You can, as a 23 year old in London, whether living with your parents on not, live a perfectly reasonable life on £11.50/hour. Yet there are no Brits, literally none, in that shop.
Less than 20 minutes walk away, there is social housing with high levels of unemployment.
Are Brits much less employable? Or does our tax & benefits system discourage working?
Or is it a bit of both?
Because I simply don't buy the "Pret is prejudiced against British nationals" bullshit.
That is terrible. Why doesn't the dole office arrange interviews for eligible candidates and insist on a genuine trial of employment
I live up the road from Meeks (Emily T is my MP). I am sitting in my local Pret right now. All the staff bar one are foreign.
I think the problem is we Brits have a cultural aversion to "service" jobs. They are seen as demeaning.
I have to admit myself, I felt the same way as a teenager - ignored my parent's unsubtle suggestions to get a shelf stacking job, and waited until something a bit less déclassé turned up (market research in this case).
... when I was a teenager I would take any and all work I could get - stacking shelves, picking fruit, table service work - ... When I left uni in the mid 80s with a geology degree in the middle of a huge slump in work opportunities I spent two years working for Tarmac building roads and later as a shotfirer in the quarries. Basically we should be teaching our young that any job at all outside of porn and drug dealing is better than no job. It is the way generations were brought up in the past and something we need to return to.
I agree with all of that. I worked from 11 part time and holidays and it gave me a real appreciation of working life for most people.
Typical of this Forum - boasting about breaking the law
Paper rounds were legal in 1970 as was paid singing in the choir.
So:- England was great when it allowed child labour, eh?
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
I think Spain might take a dim view of promoting secession.....
A Norway-style Single Market deal could be done on a QMV basis.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
It is an interesting "what if" to speculate on the future if indyScot stays in the EU and rUK goes for hard Brexit? It is hard to see such an arrangement being the final settlement, since it would set up a whole range of pressures that eventually would change things again.
P.s. OT anyone any idea why my iPad has suddenly stopped jumping up to the top of the thread and the comment box when I click "quote". Suddenly I am having to scroll up myself, which is irritating.
It's Apple.
Get a decent tablet. And if you want a large phone instead, I hear Samsung recently had a decent combined phablet / handwarmer in the shops.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused? "Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms." I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
As a supporter of Sindy, I am puzzled as to how the SNP sell to the voters a proposal whereby they avoid tariffs on the 15% of trade (with the EU) and gain tariffs on the 60% of trade (with the UK)?
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
It is an interesting "what if" to speculate on the future if indyScot stays in the EU and rUK goes for hard Brexit? It is hard to see such an arrangement being the final settlement, since it would set up a whole range of pressures that eventually would change things again.
P.s. OT anyone any idea why my iPad has suddenly stopped jumping up to the top of the thread and the comment box when I click "quote". Suddenly I am having to scroll up myself, which is irritating.
It will be a good day for democracy when we get an opposition worthy of the name. But I lack confidence that the current composition of the Labour Party can ever provide that. Surely you need time for the non-Labour 'members' to get bored or have their membership lapse before any credible leadership will be ALLOWED to emerge?
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
I think Spain might take a dim view of promoting secession.....
Indeed. But could they stop such an offer?
(I don't think this would happen, but I can imagine some EU top bods are considering it as a possible option. In fact, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they were not).
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
But of course in Brexiteers' eyes, the referendum result must be supreme over government and parliament. Part of their campaign to get back to the good old British constitutional system we had before we went into Europe, I suppose. On second thoughts, probably the irony does go right over their heads.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I think Dave's highest was 98%. IIRC after winning GE2015
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
Presumably you are also lying breathlessly on the floor in shock and amazement after your hero declined to file a law suit against the New York Times by midnight last night?
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
I've never supported *him* - I support what he represents - same as I never supported Farage, but agreed with what he wanted to do.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
I think If Scotland decides by referendum to leave the UK with the intention of remaining in the EU as an independent country, and does so before the rUK leaves the EU via Article 50, the EU would come up with some transitional arrangement for Scotland which would allow the "Four Freedoms" to continue uninterrupted. It would require (a) Scottish people to show a clear preference for independence; (b) the UK government to allow a timely referendum to take place. Neither of these look good at the moment.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
But of course in Brexiteers' eyes, the referendum result must be supreme over government and parliament. Part of their campaign to get back to the good old British constitutional system we had before we went into Europe, I suppose. On second thoughts, probably the irony does go right over their heads.
The government isn't required to no, but it can and has chosen to do so. As the government promised to do before the referendum. Not sure where you are struggling here.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Hello.
I thought of you as I wrote that then thought that surely even you must see May as better than Corbyn even if not your ideal choice.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
I think If Scotland decides by referendum to leave the UK with the intention of remaining in the EU as an independent country, and does so before the rUK leaves the EU via Article 50, the EU would come up with some transitional arrangement for Scotland which would allow the "Four Freedoms" to continue uninterrupted. It would require (a) Scottish people to show a clear preference for independence; (b) the UK government to allow a timely referendum to take place. Neither of these look good at the moment.
Good question from Josias, as ever, and yes, I was wondering this.
I think the Scots will be looked on very favourably by Europe for the reasons he cites. The Neo Auld Alliance!
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery
Which apparently involves posting easily verifiable lies.
And then ignoring anyone who points out you have posted lies.
And then reposting the lies that have been debunked.
I'm a little surprised by Donald Tusk's reported comments this morning. Not that the EU will not compromise on free movement, he says, but that he suggested Britain might decide not to leave, even if currently hardly anyone believes that to be a possibility. It surprises me because I had thought the EU position would be that we are in effect already out the door, and that's that. Not that I think it at all likely that the public mood would change enough for the political mood to consider not going through with Brexit (not least because the complexities even in doing that, particularly if A50 is triggered soon as intended), but I foresee one of the problems being that the EU collectively, whatever Tusk might think, would work to make sure we do not change our minds as I doubt they want us to stay now, despite protestations it is unfortunate.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
But of course in Brexiteers' eyes, the referendum result must be supreme over government and parliament.
Not all Brexiteers. It is quite correct the referendum was not binding, and personally whether the government has the power or parliament retains the power to take the formal action to leave is an interesting one. If parliament is the one legally with the power, that is the way things must be - they are free to ignore the referendum if they want, but I think we can all agree that is improbable to say the least. Some Remainers even are more committed to Brexit now than some Brexiteers.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
Ultimately, though, the negotiation is with the leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain. The text of a settlement will be put to the Council of Ministers, who will vote by QMV.
The only extent to which the EU gets a vote is that the parliament has to agree. And one would hope that the various groups would take their leads from their political masters.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Hello.
I remember a poll pre Brexit that showed two BNP supporters favoured remaining in the European Union.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
There are still many Trumpers on PB.
Plato Taffys William Glenn Paul Bedfordshire
There are more...
Don't forget the crypto Trumpers.
'Golly, those are two awful candidates, it must hell for an American voter.'
Then follows eighteen paragraphs on why Clinton is so awful and reasons not to vote for her.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
It will be the fault of the EU and we're so glad be to be shot of them.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
There are still many Trumpers on PB.
Plato Taffys William Glenn Paul Bedfordshire
There are more...
Don't forget the crypto Trumpers.
'Golly, those are two awful candidates, it must hell for an American voter.'
Then follows eighteen paragraphs on why Clinton is so awful and reasons not to vote for her.
Yes, the not-so-stealth "Plague on Both Their Houses" brigade.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
It is an interesting "what if" to speculate on the future if indyScot stays in the EU and rUK goes for hard Brexit? It is hard to see such an arrangement being the final settlement, since it would set up a whole range of pressures that eventually would change things again.
P.s. OT anyone any idea why my iPad has suddenly stopped jumping up to the top of the thread and the comment box when I click "quote". Suddenly I am having to scroll up myself, which is irritating.
It's Apple.
Get a decent tablet. And if you want a large phone instead, I hear Samsung recently had a decent combined phablet / handwarmer in the shops.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery
Which apparently involves posting easily verifiable lies.
And then ignoring anyone who points out you have posted lies.
And then reposting the lies that have been debunked.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Hello.
Hello. when is the article on why Dem over sampling is wrong? Yesterdays Fox news poll shows a 9% lead Dem i.d vs. Rep a jump of 7% from the last poll that has to be reaason for lead.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Only 1% of Con voters think Corbyn would be a better PM than May (the rest aren't sure).
By contrast 12% of Lab voters (and 26% of Lab 2015 voters) think May a better PM than Corbyn
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
There are still many Trumpers on PB.
Plato Taffys William Glenn Paul Bedfordshire
There are more...
Don't forget the crypto Trumpers.
'Golly, those are two awful candidates, it must hell for an American voter.'
Then follows eighteen paragraphs on why Clinton is so awful and reasons not to vote for her.
I could easily do that but would still end up voting for Clinton, were I in the US!
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Hello.
I thought of you as I wrote that then thought that surely even you must see May as better than Corbyn even if not your ideal choice.
I went for don't know.
Corbyn might be awful but at least a speech of his has never made the pound tank like Mrs May has managed.
I also have doubts about the suitability to be PM of someone who appoints David Davis and Liam Fox to key Brexit roles
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
I am.
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Hello.
Hello. when is the article on why Dem over sampling is wrong? Yesterdays Fox news poll shows a 9% lead Dem i.d vs. Rep a jump of 7% from the last poll that has to be reaason for lead.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
But of course in Brexiteers' eyes, the referendum result must be supreme over government and parliament. Part of their campaign to get back to the good old British constitutional system we had before we went into Europe, I suppose. On second thoughts, probably the irony does go right over their heads.
Things are put to referendums when they are of constitutional impact and considered too important to leave to Parliament or the result of a General Elections. We have had referendums since the Scottish devolution one in 1975ish and they are nothing to do with the EU, in any case if you think people voted Out as a way of returning to a mythical 1386 constitutional settlement or somesuch you are erecting a huge straw man. In pre-referendum publicity the Government made clear it would act on the result, which therefore constitutes an instruction to act in a certain way.
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
I wonder who the 4% of Tories that aren't convinced May is better than Corbyn are ...
Hello.
I thought of you as I wrote that then thought that surely even you must see May as better than Corbyn even if not your ideal choice.
I went for don't know.
Corbyn might be awful but at least a speech of his has never made the pound tank like Mrs May has managed.
I also have doubts about the suitability to be PM of someone who appoints David Davis and Liam Fox to key Brexit roles
A speech of his proclaiming general election victory would do plenty to the pound, I'm sure.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private - with the exception of open borders type EU thinking.
Trump has too much alpha male show-off - Hillary is a robot who needs to be told when to smile.
A dismal choice, but it shows what a dire state the GOP and Dems are in.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
Ultimately, though, the negotiation is with the leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain. The text of a settlement will be put to the Council of Ministers, who will vote by QMV.
The only extent to which the EU gets a vote is that the parliament has to agree. And one would hope that the various groups would take their leads from their political masters.
Although there isn't any evidence that the leaders of of Germany, France, Italy and Spain think differently from EU officials on the need for a hard line against the UK. Donald Tusk as President of the European Council represents those leaders. The Council is the heads of government body within the EU.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
If the government makes a hash of it, we kick them out and elect a different one...
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private - with the exception of open borders type EU thinking.
Trump has too much alpha male show-off - Hillary is a robot who needs to be told when to smile.
A dismal choice, but it shows what a dire state the GOP and Dems are in.
"The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private"
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
I am.
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
It’s not an unreasonable argument by any means. Clearly the US system is “profoundly broken” with, for one, a savagely gerrymandered House and, like here, a very, very, disengaged WWC. Just maybe it’s collapse following a Trump victory would be good for it.
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
I see the chances of war with someone as unhinged as Trump in charge as being much greater.
You are right about the US political system being a mess. But the problem with Russia does not lie in the US: it lies with Russia, and particularly Putin. Trump might appease Putin, but history has shown many times how appeasement can fail hideously.
The question is simple: according to US values, is what Putin's Russia doing right or wrong? If it is wrong, then it should be treated as such. It should not be appeased.
There are many examples of where we - both the UK and the west as a whole - have turned blind eyes to wrongdoing for political reasons, and more often than not they come back and bite us.
Mike Cernovich Doug Band worries that Chelsea Clinton told one of George W. Bush's daughters about potential malfeasance at the Clinton Foundation https://t.co/dnGvkJeG1Q #Wikileaks
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
Ultimately, though, the negotiation is with the leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain. The text of a settlement will be put to the Council of Ministers, who will vote by QMV.
The only extent to which the EU gets a vote is that the parliament has to agree. And one would hope that the various groups would take their leads from their political masters.
Although there isn't any evidence that the leaders of of Germany, France, Italy and Spain think differently from EU officials on the need for a hard line against the UK. Donald Tusk as President of the European Council represents those leaders. The Council is the heads of government body within the EU.
The leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain face re-election. A recession caused by a mishandled Brexit would endanger their jobs, and probably be a greater existential threat to the EU than a more sensible negotiated agreement.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
Given Sturgeon's speech yesterday, might an EU wanting a certain amount of vengeance on the UK offer Scotland a one-time-only offer that cannot be refused?
"Leave the UK and join us on these really advantageous terms."
I find it hard to think what those terms might be, but I can imagine it might prove tempting to some on both sides.
I think If Scotland decides by referendum to leave the UK with the intention of remaining in the EU as an independent country, and does so before the rUK leaves the EU via Article 50, the EU would come up with some transitional arrangement for Scotland which would allow the "Four Freedoms" to continue uninterrupted. It would require (a) Scottish people to show a clear preference for independence; (b) the UK government to allow a timely referendum to take place. Neither of these look good at the moment.
Good question from Josias, as ever, and yes, I was wondering this.
I think the Scots will be looked on very favourably by Europe for the reasons he cites. The Neo Auld Alliance!
Given the continent's thinking on these things, they would probably regard the UKs current terms as the most favourable possible. The only question would be whether some of Dave's renegotiations might be included, though not all are especially relevant to Scotland - financial passporting guarantees might be very useful to Edinburgh if they chose to remain outwith Eurozone, emergency brake given the relatively low immigration into Scotland, not so much.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
If the government makes a hash of it, we kick them out and elect a different one...
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private
Weighted age sample wrong. Labour getting a boost from that. 18-24 = 194, 65+ = 350. 65+ should be approx 3x 18-24.
Elementary error, comrade. 100% of da yoof will turn out to vote for their hero Corbyn, along with non-voters of all ages inspired by the ideals of unlimited immigration and unilateral disarmament. The Zionist MSM polls don't tell you this.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
I am.
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
Thank you. I don't agree of course, but it is a rational position.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private
You have yet to post any evidence of this.
OMG!!!! Do you have eyes? And an electronic interwebby device? And perhaps even watched anything I've posted here?
Your absurd handwaving is hilarious - do keep at it.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
Oh, dear. This nonsense again?
The government told Parliament that it would be binding, and Parliament didn't object.
The government then told the people that it would be binding.
Sorry no.
May has reserve power to exercise Article 50. But parliament has no obligation to respect the referendum. It would be politically "brave" but not illegal.
I have a number of friends in the USA, most of whom were or are military (USAAF). They find themselves in a real quandary in this election, because they don't like either candidate.
However, they will vote Trump or simply not vote at all rather then vote Hilary. There are three reasons for this:
1) Constitutional. She doesn't seem to care much for the rigidity of the constitution, and more importantly the separation of powers. They say this is demonstrated by the nature of presidential pardons made by Bill Clinton which had potential links to the Hilary New York campaign and to the Clinton foundation, as well as a strong and fairly well evidenced suspicion that certain gov't departments such as the IRS were used to attack political opponents.
They also suspect that the Gibson Guitar corp (Norlin) were targeted by the EPA for use of 'illegal wood' - but the shipments in question were never charged over (despite being permanently confiscated), and other guitar companies such as PRS and Fender were left alone despite using the same shipment and procurement firms in the EU. Norlin was the only open Republican at the last election in the industry. (they are all musicians)
They also worry about Obamacare - remembering that Clinton's failed healthcare plans wee even worse, and that she will use the Supreme court to forever change the landscape of the balance of State and Federal power to force these changes through, and that will never be undone.
2) Economically, Obamacare registers hugely, and they don't think that the current direction of travel should be continued upon. They still rankle at the loss of 'Hard Money' rather than the current ever expanding system of debt financing. (They weren't that happy with Bush on that either).
3) Foreign policy - they are fed up of a 'weak' America which draws lines in the sand and then takes the broom out to them and quietly erases them. They think that a militarily strong USA is vital to world peace (and these guys have nearly all served in hot wars, or their families have), and they see the Syria debacle and the resurgent Russia as being very much the fault of Kerry, Clinton and Obama.
They're holding their noses, but their reasons shouldn't be dismissed as non issues compared to the respective personal issues between the candidates (which they seemingly couldn't care less about).
Weighted age sample wrong. Labour getting a boost from that. 18-24 = 194, 65+ = 350. 65+ should be approx 3x 18-24.
Elementary error, comrade. 100% of da yoof will turn out to vote for their hero Corbyn, along with non-voters of all ages inspired by the ideals of unlimited immigration and unilateral disarmament. The Zionist MSM polls don't tell you this.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private
You have yet to post any evidence of this.
Sometimes the mask slips with Hillary. "50% are deplorable".
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
I am.
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
Thank you. I don't agree of course, but it is a rational position.
I don't think it any more rational than those Labour party members who voted Jezza to shake up the New Labour Spadocracy.
My house needs decorating and new carpets, so I will set it on fire...
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
I'm not a great believer in local by-elections as a predictor of much but the mismatch between the national polls and the local results is striking. The public seem to be backing the Conservatives nationally in the absence of an alternative, not because they like them much.
I have a number of friends in the USA, most of whom were or are military (USAAF). They find themselves in a real quandary in this election, because they don't like either candidate.
However, they will vote Trump or simply not vote at all rather then vote Hilary. There are three reasons for this:
1) Constitutional. She doesn't seem to care much for the rigidity of the constitution, and more importantly the separation of powers. They say this is demonstrated by the nature of presidential pardons made by Bill Clinton which had potential links to the Hilary New York campaign and to the Clinton foundation, as well as a strong and fairly well evidenced suspicion that certain gov't departments such as the IRS were used to attack political opponents.
They also suspect that the Gibson Guitar corp (Norlin) were targeted by the EPA for use of 'illegal wood' - but the shipments in question were never charged over (despite being permanently confiscated), and other guitar companies such as PRS and Fender were left alone despite using the same shipment and procurement firms in the EU. Norlin was the only open Republican at the last election in the industry. (they are all musicians)
They also worry about Obamacare - remembering that Clinton's failed healthcare plans wee even worse, and that she will use the Supreme court to forever change the landscape of the balance of State and Federal power to force these changes through, and that will never be undone.
2) Economically, Obamacare registers hugely, and they don't think that the current direction of travel should be continued upon. They still rankle at the loss of 'Hard Money' rather than the current ever expanding system of debt financing. (They weren't that happy with Bush on that either).
3) Foreign policy - they are fed up of a 'weak' America which draws lines in the sand and then takes the broom out to them and quietly erases them. They think that a militarily strong USA is vital to world peace (and these guys have nearly all served in hot wars, or their families have), and they see the Syria debacle and the resurgent Russia as being very much the fault of Kerry, Clinton and Obama.
They're holding their noses, but their reasons shouldn't be dismissed as non issues compared to the respective personal issues between the candidates (which they seemingly couldn't care less about).
Interesting, thanks.
I must admit that I'm finding this election really policy-free. In the past most (all?) Dem and Re candidates have made statements and policies on Space. As far as I'm aware, neither have done so this time.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
Oh, dear. This nonsense again?
The government told Parliament that it would be binding, and Parliament didn't object.
The government then told the people that it would be binding.
Sorry no.
May has reserve power to exercise Article 50. But parliament has no obligation to respect the referendum. It would be politically "brave" but not illegal.
Yes, of course Parliament could legislate to override the referendum result (if it were nuts) and the government could ignore it (if it were suicidal). But they key point is that Parliament isn't required to act further in order for the referendum result to be implemented by the government.
Comments
However, I don't fully agree with your statement. The UK was, to a certain extent, a brake on the ambitions of some in the EU for the organisation's future shape. Now we've left, they're freer to head in the direction they want. I know you'll disagree with this, but these noises may not have happened if we'd voted to remain. Our vote to leave might have massively accelerated EU integration. (*)
Or perhaps, they would have been emboldened by a remain vote. However I doubt that would be the case if the vote had been an equally narrow remain. A stonking remain win would have emboldened them.
But we cannot know, as there is no control experiment.
(*) And if this is the case, then they're heading for trouble. As I wrote last night, the EU project's leaders don't seem to have understood why we wanted to leave. This means they're unlikely to correct the flaws before another country votes to leave.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/10/14/the-real-threat-to-jeremy-corbyn-now-comes-from-the-left
They banned James O'Keefe yesterday for posting recordings of ballot stuffing/destroying by Democrats.
It's so obvious.
Latest @YouGov Con 42 (+3) Lab 28 (-2) LD 9 (+1) UKIP 11 (-2) https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/10/13/voting-intention-conservatives-lead-labour-14-poin/
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
Get a decent tablet. And if you want a large phone instead, I hear Samsung recently had a decent combined phablet / handwarmer in the shops.
Plato - are you actually still supporting him?
Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
May: 51 (96)
Corbyn: 18 (59)
I'm not sure Dave ever quite got to 96.......
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/vohvzlss3c/TimesResults_161012_VI_Trackers_W.pdf
Corbyn draws with May (30 vs 29 for May) among the 18-24 year olds, but is less than half in all other age groups....among 65+ its 76: 5. I suppose when the 18 year olds are 65 Corbyn might be alright....except he'll be 114......
(I don't think this would happen, but I can imagine some EU top bods are considering it as a possible option. In fact, they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they were not).
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
Allahpundit Retweeted Josh Jordan
He’s gonna tweet this with a “THANK YOU, TEXAS!” graphic
Allahpundit added,
Josh Jordan @NumbersMuncher
WFAA/SurveyUSA Texas poll:
Trump 47
Clinton 43
Johnson 3…
0 replies . 31 retweets 95 likes
But of course in Brexiteers' eyes, the referendum result must be supreme over government and parliament. Part of their campaign to get back to the good old British constitutional system we had before we went into Europe, I suppose. On second thoughts, probably the irony does go right over their heads.
Tomorrow's front page takes a break from Trump's sexual assault scandals to focus on how he lied about donating to 9/11 charities. Oof.
This isn't like LEAVE because Nigel wasn't an absolute piece of shit.
18-24 = 194, 65+ = 350.
65+ should be approx 3x 18-24.
There are still many Trumpers on PB.
Plato
Taffys
William Glenn
Paul Bedfordshire
There are more...
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
Good question from Josias, as ever, and yes, I was wondering this.
I think the Scots will be looked on very favourably by Europe for the reasons he cites. The Neo Auld Alliance!
And then ignoring anyone who points out you have posted lies.
And then reposting the lies that have been debunked.
The only extent to which the EU gets a vote is that the parliament has to agree. And one would hope that the various groups would take their leads from their political masters.
I remember a poll pre Brexit that showed two BNP supporters favoured remaining in the European Union.
'Golly, those are two awful candidates, it must hell for an American voter.'
Then follows eighteen paragraphs on why Clinton is so awful and reasons not to vote for her.
That's not a Leaver thing. It's human nature.
Transparent.
By contrast 12% of Lab voters (and 26% of Lab 2015 voters) think May a better PM than Corbyn
May leads Corbyn even in Scotland (37 vs 25)
Corbyn might be awful but at least a speech of his has never made the pound tank like Mrs May has managed.
I also have doubts about the suitability to be PM of someone who appoints David Davis and Liam Fox to key Brexit roles
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
The government told Parliament that it would be binding, and Parliament didn't object.
The government then told the people that it would be binding.
Trump has too much alpha male show-off - Hillary is a robot who needs to be told when to smile.
A dismal choice, but it shows what a dire state the GOP and Dems are in.
LOL. No.
You are right about the US political system being a mess. But the problem with Russia does not lie in the US: it lies with Russia, and particularly Putin. Trump might appease Putin, but history has shown many times how appeasement can fail hideously.
The question is simple: according to US values, is what Putin's Russia doing right or wrong? If it is wrong, then it should be treated as such. It should not be appeased.
There are many examples of where we - both the UK and the west as a whole - have turned blind eyes to wrongdoing for political reasons, and more often than not they come back and bite us.
Doug Band worries that Chelsea Clinton told one of George W. Bush's daughters about potential malfeasance at the Clinton Foundation https://t.co/dnGvkJeG1Q #Wikileaks
"The Foreign Office is stuffed full of pinkos and traitors."
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/4033/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-i-m-not-sure-a-jeremy-corbyn-led-labour-party-is-equipped-t/p1
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Your absurd handwaving is hilarious - do keep at it.
May has reserve power to exercise Article 50.
But parliament has no obligation to respect the referendum. It would be politically "brave" but not illegal.
http://order-order.com/2016/10/14/thornberrys-brexit-question-booed-question-time/
QT audiences are notoriously stacked against the Conservatives but there is a growing level of resentment amongst WC folk to Remain politicians.
However, they will vote Trump or simply not vote at all rather then vote Hilary. There are three reasons for this:
1) Constitutional. She doesn't seem to care much for the rigidity of the constitution, and more importantly the separation of powers. They say this is demonstrated by the nature of presidential pardons made by Bill Clinton which had potential links to the Hilary New York campaign and to the Clinton foundation, as well as a strong and fairly well evidenced suspicion that certain gov't departments such as the IRS were used to attack political opponents.
They also suspect that the Gibson Guitar corp (Norlin) were targeted by the EPA for use of 'illegal wood' - but the shipments in question were never charged over (despite being permanently confiscated), and other guitar companies such as PRS and Fender were left alone despite using the same shipment and procurement firms in the EU. Norlin was the only open Republican at the last election in the industry. (they are all musicians)
They also worry about Obamacare - remembering that Clinton's failed healthcare plans wee even worse, and that she will use the Supreme court to forever change the landscape of the balance of State and Federal power to force these changes through, and that will never be undone.
2) Economically, Obamacare registers hugely, and they don't think that the current direction of travel should be continued upon. They still rankle at the loss of 'Hard Money' rather than the current ever expanding system of debt financing. (They weren't that happy with Bush on that either).
3) Foreign policy - they are fed up of a 'weak' America which draws lines in the sand and then takes the broom out to them and quietly erases them. They think that a militarily strong USA is vital to world peace (and these guys have nearly all served in hot wars, or their families have), and they see the Syria debacle and the resurgent Russia as being very much the fault of Kerry, Clinton and Obama.
They're holding their noses, but their reasons shouldn't be dismissed as non issues compared to the respective personal issues between the candidates (which they seemingly couldn't care less about).
Well, not full.
My house needs decorating and new carpets, so I will set it on fire...
I must admit that I'm finding this election really policy-free. In the past most (all?) Dem and Re candidates have made statements and policies on Space. As far as I'm aware, neither have done so this time.