If they are not then; be like that, WTO and a foreign policy to undermine and subvert the EU and eventually provoke its breakup.
Why it sensible for the EU to agree a good deal? If the UK gets a good deal and flourishes, the EU will go into economic meltdown and the entire institution will almost inevitably collapse as other countries join the bandwagon.
It is surely in the EU's interest to give us an absolutely appalling deal, and screw us into the ground, even if this comes at a considerable economic cost to other EU members. (ie screwing their own car manufacturers)
Any deal that allows the UK to flourish or even just survive rather than be crucified would bring the biggest existential crisis down on the EU it has ever faced. The "sensible" thing for the EU to do is therefore surely to crucify the UK and make sure it seen to be crucified, even if this involves some limited self-harm to other EU members, in order to prevenet the bigger threat of EU armageddon...
Isn't this just basis survival logic?
And if that failed to crucify us, what then U boats to sink our merchant shipping throttling our trade and the luftwaffe to flatten the city of London? I seem to recall that this didnt work last time either. We just said get stuffed and carried on.
Its not us with 50% youth unemployment, negative interest rates, fascist parties on the verge of winning elections, confiscation of savers money from banks and huge banks on the verge of collapse.
When in a crumbling greenhouse it is most advisable not to throw stone
I have always believed that it was the Yanks who won WW2 - and indeed WW1. Please explain to me where I have gone wrong.
In those terms we unquestionably won world war 1 (yanks were useful but by no means essential) and Russia World War 2 (us and the yanks just stopped the warsaw pact bloc extending to the english channel).
The point is that bazzer (and I fear the EU) wholly misunderstand the British psyche which is to tolerate the most dreadful privations with even a small measure of relish if the alternative is an outsider running their affairs - however benignly. And seek to repay them a hundredfold for such privations.
The difference this time is that a large part of the British populus and politicians would see the damage as self-inflicted. And voters will clearly choose to blame the Tories rather than blame themselves.
The sort of people who wanted Halifax to succeed Chamberlain not that ghastly far right warmonger loon Churchill.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
The likes of Lammy trying to get the Commons to reject the result, or the lawyer taking the Government to court does not endear them to any of the Leave voters or the majority (I would say) of the Remain voters, who have accepted the democratic decision.
* in the EC, McMullin takes Utah and there's no majority.
According to the 12th amendment, the HoR gets to pick the president out of Clinton, Trump and McMullin... But wait! There needs to be a quorum, which is two-thirds, i.e. 34 states. So a fourth option arises:
* enough R states abstain so that the quorum is not achieved
* whoever the Senate picks as vice-president, i.e. Pence, becomes president
* Betfair pay out on Pence
(Another scenario is if R don't hold the Senate. Then the R states in the HoR can, if they really don't want Clinton, give the presidency to Kaine.)
Conclusion:
no majority in EC => presidency goes to the VP candidate of whichever party wins the Senate.
P.s. I also forgot leadership - the allied leadership systems allowed more independent action (at strategic level) whereas the Germans were increasingly hampered by one man's erratic and controlling ways. However at battlefield level it was considered the German setup was superior.
Mr. B2, what about the war at sea? The battle of the Atlantic in the period before spring 1943 had some very dodgy times. If things had gone a bit more adrift in the period '39-'41 then the UK might have been starved into submission before the Sceptics ever entered the war.
I don't think it was inevitable that the allies would have won the war.
If this happens, could the next four years be a bit like 1997 (writ small) for the Republicans, or have they gone too far to recover (in terms of getting a candidate with broader appeal)?
Assuming, of course, Trump doesn't win.
I think the risk now is anger turning into civil unrest whatever the result. The Trumpers are furious over the vote manipulation, the media collusion, the insults et al. The Bernie fans now know for certain that the DNC had chosen Hillary already and sabotaged him. As did the GOP over Trump.
A lot of unhappy people are feeling this is a sham rigged election and it's being bent to a soviet level by propaganda pretending to be news.
I saw a poll last night saying 65% GOP feel betrayed by their own Party after failing to back their own nominee. The RNC haven't spent a single dollar supporting Trump yet. They'd spent tens of millions by now for Romney.
Oh I see even if Trump loses u won't accept the result. Sad!
I dont think it matters a fig whether Plato accepts it or not. If millionsn of well armed citizens in flyover states dont then that is another matter.
The difference this time is that a large part of the British populus and politicians would see the damage as self-inflicted. And voters will clearly choose to blame the Tories rather than blame themselves.
No. A large part of the British populus isn't remotely that obsessed and has moved on with their life with marginal but fleeting interest in what the politicians make out of it, at least unless someone forces a change in direction. A small, noisy, but electorally insignificant number of political obsessives like us bang on about who will take the blame.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
(Snip)
Mr Dancer,
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
The likes of Lammy trying to get the Commons to reject the result, or the lawyer taking the Government to court does not endear them to any of the Leave voters or the majority (I would say) of the Remain voters, who have accepted the democratic decision.
Exactly this. Ask the people again, either directly or indirectly and it will make the Winchester By-election rerun look indecisive.
If they are not then; be like that, WTO and a foreign policy to undermine and subvert the EU and eventually provoke its breakup.
Why it sensible for the EU to agree a good deal? If the UK gets a good deal and flourishes, the EU will go into economic meltdown and the entire institution will almost inevitably collapse as other countries join the bandwagon.
It is surely in the EU's interest to give us an absolutely appalling deal, and screw us into the ground, even if this comes at a considerable economic cost to other EU members. (ie screwing their own car manufacturers)
Any deal that allows the UK to flourish or even just survive rather than be crucified would bring the biggest existential crisis down on the EU it has ever faced. The "sensible" thing for the EU to do is therefore surely to crucify the UK and make sure it seen to be crucified, even if this involves some limited self-harm to other EU members, in order to prevenet the bigger threat of EU armageddon...
Isn't this just basis survival logic?
And if that failed to crucify us, what then U boats to sink our merchant shipping throttling our trade and the luftwaffe to flatten the city of London? I seem to recall that this didnt work last time either. We just said get stuffed and carried on.
Its not us with 50% youth unemployment, negative interest rates, fascist parties on the verge of winning elections, confiscation of savers money from banks and huge banks on the verge of collapse.
When in a crumbling greenhouse it is most advisable not to throw stone
I have always believed that it was the Yanks who won WW2 - and indeed WW1. Please explain to me where I have gone wrong.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
(Snip)
Mr Dancer,
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
(Snip)
Mr Dancer,
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
Only from your perspective, one assumed not from theirs. If you are a person that puts an extremely high value of leaving, then its a net benefit for the country even if financially very tough - ask the Scottish Nationalists.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
The likes of Lammy trying to get the Commons to reject the result, or the lawyer taking the Government to court does not endear them to any of the Leave voters or the majority (I would say) of the Remain voters, who have accepted the democratic decision.
But they will ultimately be irrelevant actions and therefore forgotten.
In the hypothetical scenario of Brexit turning very bad for the UK, it would be the defining event of our generation and influence politics for decades thereafter. Having inflicted the whole thing on us from start to finish I don't see any escape for the Tories.
Trump seems remarkably relaxed and happy to me for a man enduring press hysteria and fabrication. It must be pure love of combat.
He said earlier he was ignoring his advisors and he is always happiest when he is doing that. His latest classic is to effectively say he couldn't have groped Ms Leeds because she would not be his first choice.
The difference this time is that a large part of the British populus and politicians would see the damage as self-inflicted. And voters will clearly choose to blame the Tories rather than blame themselves.
No. A large part of the British populus isn't remotely that obsessed and has moved on with their life with marginal but fleeting interest in what the politicians make out of it, at least unless someone forces a change in direction. A small, noisy, but electorally insignificant number of political obsessives like us bang on about who will take the blame.
don't underestimate the power of events. inflation. job losses.
If this happens, could the next four years be a bit like 1997 (writ small) for the Republicans, or have they gone too far to recover (in terms of getting a candidate with broader appeal)?
Assuming, of course, Trump doesn't win.
I think the risk now is anger turning into civil unrest whatever the result. The Trumpers are furious over the vote manipulation, the media collusion, the insults et al. The Bernie fans now know for certain that the DNC had chosen Hillary already and sabotaged him. As did the GOP over Trump.
A lot of unhappy people are feeling this is a sham rigged election and it's being bent to a soviet level by propaganda pretending to be news.
I saw a poll last night saying 65% GOP feel betrayed by their own Party after failing to back their own nominee. The RNC haven't spent a single dollar supporting Trump yet. They'd spent tens of millions by now for Romney.
Oh I see even if Trump loses u won't accept the result. Sad!
I dont think it matters a fig whether Plato accepts it or not. If millionsn of well armed citizens in flyover states dont then that is another matter.
yes very scary especially when the leader himself is saying it will be fixed. I hope the authorities are on this, Trump supporters are lucky they are white they atleast won't be shot for open carrying guns.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You are letting your personal dislike for Johnson obscure your view of who exactly are the electorate that will select the next Conservative leader. Amongst MPs Johnson will win hands down over Davis, and Johnson is the darling of the lilac-rinse majority of the party membership.
If this happens, could the next four years be a bit like 1997 (writ small) for the Republicans, or have they gone too far to recover (in terms of getting a candidate with broader appeal)?
Assuming, of course, Trump doesn't win.
I think the risk now is anger turning into civil unrest whatever the result. The Trumpers are furious over the vote manipulation, the media collusion, the insults et al. The Bernie fans now know for certain that the DNC had chosen Hillary already and sabotaged him. As did the GOP over Trump.
A lot of unhappy people are feeling this is a sham rigged election and it's being bent to a soviet level by propaganda pretending to be news.
I saw a poll last night saying 65% GOP feel betrayed by their own Party after failing to back their own nominee. The RNC haven't spent a single dollar supporting Trump yet. They'd spent tens of millions by now for Romney.
Oh I see even if Trump loses u won't accept the result. Sad!
I dont think it matters a fig whether Plato accepts it or not. If millionsn of well armed citizens in flyover states dont then that is another matter.
yes very scary especially when the leader himself is saying it will be fixed. I hope the authorities are on this, Trump supporters are lucky they are white they atleast won't be shot for open carrying guns.
But hasn't Obama had to endure the same, blocked by the House at every turn and opposed out in the sticks with all sorts of nonsense? The question is whether the discontent at Clinton would be materially different.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
Interesting. Certainly 100 seems a high number. Not sure about May falling though. If there is a danger things aren't going her way I am sure she will U-turn and call a GE.
P.s. I also forgot leadership - the allied leadership systems allowed more independent action (at strategic level) whereas the Germans were increasingly hampered by one man's erratic and controlling ways. However at battlefield level it was considered the German setup was superior.
Mr. B2, what about the war at sea? The battle of the Atlantic in the period before spring 1943 had some very dodgy times. If things had gone a bit more adrift in the period '39-'41 then the UK might have been starved into submission before the Sceptics ever entered the war.
I don't think it was inevitable that the allies would have won the war.
A problem with these alternate histories is that it depends on making change that advantage one side, and ones that disadvantage the other. For instance, any history that has a successful or semi-successful (i.e. landing) Operation Sealion would depend on at least three factors varying to the advantage of the Germans.
Yes, the battle of the Atlantic was a close-run thing - and my grandfather was there in DEMS service.
But 'starving Britain into submission' is not as easy as might be supposed. Germany still gave stiff resistance at the end of the war, despite horrendous conditions. And German forces would still have had to cross the Channel.
You could equally say: if the French had closed the Ardennes, if the Americans had entered the war earlier (which might actually have happened if the Germans had been more successful in the Atlantic); if Stalin had been more prepared and had not cleansed his military, etc, etc, then Germany may have been defeated sooner.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
Interesting. Certainly 100 seems a high number. Not sure about May falling though. If there is a danger things aren't going her way I am sure she will U-turn and call a GE.
Precisely, and no matter how unpopular her views are with the Guardian reading classes, an election campaign leavened with some suitably jingoistic brexitisms and facing Jeremy Corbyn will give her a 100 majority and a rock solid mandate for the hardest leave she could wish for.
P.s. I also forgot leadership - the allied leadership systems allowed more independent action (at strategic level) whereas the Germans were increasingly hampered by one man's erratic and controlling ways. However at battlefield level it was considered the German setup was superior.
Mr. B2, what about the war at sea? The battle of the Atlantic in the period before spring 1943 had some very dodgy times. If things had gone a bit more adrift in the period '39-'41 then the UK might have been starved into submission before the Sceptics ever entered the war.
I don't think it was inevitable that the allies would have won the war.
There was a chapter in the book about that, I think, but it's a while since i have read it. I think the conclusion was that Britain could have fought on from the empire and wait for the Americans and Russians,
Anyhow it is a good book. - clear well-written and thoughtful analysis. It's quite high level so glosses over a lot of detail, but that also makes its conclusions easier to follow. Very good reviews on Amazon.
Edit/ I think the inevitability arises from the significant and growing flaws on the German side, which sooner or later would lead to downfall (and, indeed, Downfall).
Besides, as all PB'ers know, a coalition is always best.... ;-)
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Re blame taking, we're much more likely to see a poor deal as the result of a narky and retaliatory Europe. The last act of a loathed institution.
That is just another reason why May needs to run domestic policy at the same time as Brexit. Show we're doing our best at home and trying hardest abroad, and it'll be Remainiacs and EU figureheads who are blamed for a any bad deal.
* in the EC, McMullin takes Utah and there's no majority.
According to the 12th amendment, the HoR gets to pick the president out of Clinton, Trump and McMullin... But wait! There needs to be a quorum, which is two-thirds, i.e. 34 states. So a fourth option arises:
* enough R states abstain so that the quorum is not achieved
* whoever the Senate picks as vice-president, i.e. Pence, becomes president
* Betfair pay out on Pence
(Another scenario is if R don't hold the Senate. Then the R states in the HoR can, if they really don't want Clinton, give the presidency to Kaine.)
Conclusion:
no majority in EC => presidency goes to the VP candidate of whichever party wins the Senate.
And if that is locked 50:50 - the Speaker?
I think the existing vice-president, Joe Biden, president of the Senate, would get a casting vote. But if they're supposed to elect a new president of the Senate to do it, and they're locked, then goodness knows...
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
Re blame taking, we're much more likely to see a poor deal as the result of a narky and retaliatory Europe. The last act of a loathed institution.
That is just another reason why May needs to run domestic policy at the same time as Brexit. Show we're doing our best at home and trying hardest abroad, and it'll be Remainiacs and EU figureheads who are blamed for a any bad deal.
They are already handing her all the ammunition she needs, the latest Tusk missive about there only being Hard Brexit or No Brexit plays straight into her hands, she will assume a pious mein (shouldn't be hard for a daughter of a vicar) and wax lyrical about how we tried our hardest to accommodate the views on all sides, but were able to make no progress against an obdurate and hostile EU elite.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
(Snip)
Mr Dancer,
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
Only from your perspective, one assumed not from theirs. If you are a person that puts an extremely high value of leaving, then its a net benefit for the country even if financially very tough - ask the Scottish Nationalists.
Exactly. But that's the point: from their perspective they'll be doing the country good, in the same way some leavers think the harm caused by Brexit is worth it.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You are letting your personal dislike for Johnson obscure your view of who exactly are the electorate that will select the next Conservative leader. Amongst MPs Johnson will win hands down over Davis, and Johnson is the darling of the lilac-rinse majority of the party membership.
But Tory MPs don't like Johnson. They resent his popularity despite his not putting in the hard graft they have to do and not following the rules they have to follow.
Morning all. Another quiet day in US politics then!
Are the American electorate sophisticated enough to realise that the best way to neuter an unwanted president is to stuff both the House and Senate with their opponents - which means turning out on the day rather than abstaining?
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
Its what I think, but I may be wrong. They are backtracking every day on the role of parliament in the EU exit. Big stuff is happening in the economy. Scotland independence becoming real. I just looked at the odds on art 50 not being triggered until after June 2017, this is 21/10 on betfair. given mays statements about triggering art 50 by the end of March 2017, I see this is a proxy for the position of the current govt as a whole.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
LOL. 13 years of the Blair/Brown governments and all that brought (including further EU integration and the immigration messes). Years when they could do nothing because they were out of power.
Many would call them traitors, both to the party and the country.
And they won't have been proved 'right' or 'wrong' on the EU until many years after Brexit.
Re blame taking, we're much more likely to see a poor deal as the result of a narky and retaliatory Europe. The last act of a loathed institution.
That is just another reason why May needs to run domestic policy at the same time as Brexit. Show we're doing our best at home and trying hardest abroad, and it'll be Remainiacs and EU figureheads who are blamed for a any bad deal.
Indeed, it will not be at all difficult to scapegoat blame for any misfortune that comes out of our leaving the EU onto remainers, however unjustly.
At the root of it is Heaths terrible error/treason (depending on your point of view) in ramming through entry in parliament - depending on opposition votes to squeak it - and not putting the terms he agreed to a referendum of the UK people BEFORE we joined.
Also any attempt to incorporate us into a political entity with countries who had seriously tried to conquer us within living memory was inevitably doomed to fail
If this happens, could the next four years be a bit like 1997 (writ small) for the Republicans, or have they gone too far to recover (in terms of getting a candidate with broader appeal)?
Assuming, of course, Trump doesn't win.
I think the risk now is anger turning into civil unrest whatever the result. The Trumpers are furious over the vote manipulation, the media collusion, the insults et al. The Bernie fans now know for certain that the DNC had chosen Hillary already and sabotaged him. As did the GOP over Trump.
A lot of unhappy people are feeling this is a sham rigged election and it's being bent to a soviet level by propaganda pretending to be news.
I saw a poll last night saying 65% GOP feel betrayed by their own Party after failing to back their own nominee. The RNC haven't spent a single dollar supporting Trump yet. They'd spent tens of millions by now for Romney.
Oh I see even if Trump loses u won't accept the result. Sad!
I dont think it matters a fig whether Plato accepts it or not. If millionsn of well armed citizens in flyover states dont then that is another matter.
yes very scary especially when the leader himself is saying it will be fixed. I hope the authorities are on this, Trump supporters are lucky they are white they atleast won't be shot for open carrying guns.
But hasn't Obama had to endure the same, blocked by the House at every turn and opposed out in the sticks with all sorts of nonsense? The question is whether the discontent at Clinton would be materially different.
I'm not talking about house Repubs here, I'm talking about those who think Alex Jones is a reliable source (and there are more of those than I ever thought). nobody is going to take up arms over Romney they will for trump, especially when they believ and are being told by their chief it is fixed, he has said it many many times. So dangerous.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
May will be fine if Brexit is fine, so the scenario we are considering is if Brexit goes bad. In those circumstances I struggle to see the logic in the Davis tip - why would we (or they) go for someone who is even more Brexit? Either the Tories get rejected in a GE or they (try and) recover under a return to a Cameroon2.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
Interesting. Certainly 100 seems a high number. Not sure about May falling though. If there is a danger things aren't going her way I am sure she will U-turn and call a GE.
Precisely, and no matter how unpopular her views are with the Guardian reading classes, an election campaign leavened with some suitably jingoistic brexitisms and facing Jeremy Corbyn will give her a 100 majority and a rock solid mandate for the hardest leave she could wish for.
they need to agree what their position is on brexit in any GE campaign, they are struggling to do that. don't underestimate how spooked businesses are about hard brexit and the anti business vibe of the conference don't believe too much of her rhetoric about brexit. It is only rhetoric.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
(Snip)
Mr Dancer,
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
Not in the long run.
Actually, yes.
A few percent of GDP lost now might be very hard to 'recover' in the future: you need much higher growth that previously to undo the damage. We may have recovered in GDP terms from the 2008 crash, but we're still much poorer than we would have been if it had not happened, and a lot of people have suffered.
I've on the record on here in saying that a quick solution to Brexit, even if that means WTO, might be better for the country and economy than a long and convoluted negotiation in which we get little more. So please don't think I'm some form of continuity remain. But leavers should acknowledge that the UK may well be harmed by Brexit, even if they think it'll be worth it in the long run.
Two of the three eldest SCOTUS judges are on the liberal wing - Ginsburg and (I think) Breyer. If the Democrats gain the Senate at least one of them is certain to step down. As David says, that could lead to a liberal majority. If both go, the likelihood is that HRC will nominate one more centrist judge, as convention demands a level of balance. If the Democrats gain the House - unlikely, but possible - they will get the chance to undo the district boundaries the Republicans gerrymandered and will then gerrymander their own. The stakes are very big indeed.
I think you're right, the Dems will nominate a centrist but it wasn't a courtesy Bush2 offered when he nominated Alito and Roberts? It always seems to be the Dems who are expected to give ground.
Don't forget Obama has just offered them a Centrist and they have chosen to whine about illegitimacy and generally blow hard.
Bush replaced two conservative judges with two conservative judges. Obama replaced two liberal judges with two liberal judges.
Scalia was a conservative judge, which is why his replacement is contentious.
Mr. B2, I think that's partially true. However, the intransigence and (sometimes) actively wishing the UK ill from a small but vocal minority of Remain voters will mean, if things do go poorly, some of the irritation of the electorate will be directed their way.
(Snip)
Mr Dancer,
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
Only from your perspective, one assumed not from theirs. If you are a person that puts an extremely high value of leaving, then its a net benefit for the country even if financially very tough - ask the Scottish Nationalists.
Indeed. If I were a Scot I would undoubtably have voted for independence. Whatever short term travails, in the long term it would be worth it for self actualisation.
As English, given the relatively large area of Scotland with relatively small population and its strategic value (controlling the whole Island and eliminating the possibility of them allying with a hostile power) I consider the Barnet Tribute and extra powers for their jumped up county council (or as Bevan might put it, stuffing their mouths with Gold) a price well worth paying to keep them in the Union.
A lesson the EU is incapable of learning it seems.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You are letting your personal dislike for Johnson obscure your view of who exactly are the electorate that will select the next Conservative leader. Amongst MPs Johnson will win hands down over Davis, and Johnson is the darling of the lilac-rinse majority of the party membership.
But Tory MPs don't like Johnson. They resent his popularity despite his not putting in the hard graft they have to do and not following the rules they have to follow.
a lot can change quickly re johnsons position with tory MP's. Standing down in the last leadership election was bizarre. Part of his support amongst MPs is based on the idea he is popular with voters. But he has pissed off a large amount of pro Europe voters. May is popular with the selectorate. She would need to either quit or be forced out. I believe that the position with Brexit is untenable and there is no face saving manouvere for her re Article 50.
Two of the three eldest SCOTUS judges are on the liberal wing - Ginsburg and (I think) Breyer. If the Democrats gain the Senate at least one of them is certain to step down. As David says, that could lead to a liberal majority. If both go, the likelihood is that HRC will nominate one more centrist judge, as convention demands a level of balance. If the Democrats gain the House - unlikely, but possible - they will get the chance to undo the district boundaries the Republicans gerrymandered and will then gerrymander their own. The stakes are very big indeed.
I think you're right, the Dems will nominate a centrist but it wasn't a courtesy Bush2 offered when he nominated Alito and Roberts? It always seems to be the Dems who are expected to give ground.
Don't forget Obama has just offered them a Centrist and they have chosen to whine about illegitimacy and generally blow hard.
Bush replaced two conservative judges with two conservative judges. Obama replaced two liberal judges with two liberal judges.
Scalia was a conservative judge, which is why his replacement is contentious.
The judges hold off on dying until their own side is in power?
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
Interesting. Certainly 100 seems a high number. Not sure about May falling though. If there is a danger things aren't going her way I am sure she will U-turn and call a GE.
Precisely, and no matter how unpopular her views are with the Guardian reading classes, an election campaign leavened with some suitably jingoistic brexitisms and facing Jeremy Corbyn will give her a 100 majority and a rock solid mandate for the hardest leave she could wish for.
they need to agree what their position is on brexit in any GE campaign, they are struggling to do that. don't underestimate how spooked businesses are about hard brexit and the anti business vibe of the conference don't believe too much of her rhetoric about brexit. It is only rhetoric.
Despite all the above she is 17 points clear in the polls.
Two of the three eldest SCOTUS judges are on the liberal wing - Ginsburg and (I think) Breyer. If the Democrats gain the Senate at least one of them is certain to step down. As David says, that could lead to a liberal majority. If both go, the likelihood is that HRC will nominate one more centrist judge, as convention demands a level of balance. If the Democrats gain the House - unlikely, but possible - they will get the chance to undo the district boundaries the Republicans gerrymandered and will then gerrymander their own. The stakes are very big indeed.
I think you're right, the Dems will nominate a centrist but it wasn't a courtesy Bush2 offered when he nominated Alito and Roberts? It always seems to be the Dems who are expected to give ground.
Don't forget Obama has just offered them a Centrist and they have chosen to whine about illegitimacy and generally blow hard.
Bush replaced two conservative judges with two conservative judges. Obama replaced two liberal judges with two liberal judges.
Scalia was a conservative judge, which is why his replacement is contentious.
The judges hold off on dying until their own side is in power?
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
One aspect of Brexit that is sad is how some people are becoming very American in how they use the word "patriot" in politics.
Michael Delauzen Hello, my name is Jessica Leeds, I am a Trump sexual assault victim. I just happen to be a clinton foundation secretary & hillarys friend. https://t.co/RKJidCBabz
She's the octopus lady. The plane doesn't exist and the arm rests didn't raise up.
Aside from the image, is there a link to any *evidence* in that tweet?
Evidence of some pretty vile misogyny in the comments below it. Or is that just locker room banter ?
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
LOL. 13 years of the Blair/Brown governments and all that brought (including further EU integration and the immigration messes). Years when they could do nothing because they were out of power.
Many would call them traitors, both to the party and the country.
And they won't have been proved 'right' or 'wrong' on the EU until many years after Brexit.
You're looking at what happened, which is not the way to judge here. The intention was to derail Maastricht. Without that we still might have a useful customs union that we'd be happy to be part of.
I'm not an arch Leaver - I object to sovereignty being taken away. My views are not uncommon.
Trump is actually ahead in some polls. Still, we all believe in poll averages and ignore the ones which don't fit what we want, right? #Brexit
The underlying failure of the polls in the EU referendum was that it picked up on a lot of Leave voters, but down-weighted them. The underlyings in the US Presidential election don't look like that at all, they all pick up far more Democrat voters than Republican ones.
Indeed, if anything, they are upweighting Republicans.
Yes, that's becoming the central polling difficulty. It's not that they can't pick up a representative sample, but that people's turnout behaviour varies from election to election. FWIW I think the UK polls are now downweighting Labour too much because of the pattern of young/urban Labour voters not voting or even not registering - both of which have to some extent been addressed by Corbyn enthusiasm among the young and by the serious all-party registration push before the referendm.
In the US, it's easy to imagine a lot of GOP voters staying at home. One factor which David's excellent article doesn't mention is that media coverage is overwhelmingly about the top of the ticket - I have a politics-aware friend who doesn't even know who the candidates are in her House race.
On topic, the problem for Republicans in swing districts is that they're going to get squeezed from both sides: Not only will anti-Trump moderates stay at home or vote Dem down-ticket too, Trump enthusiasts are increasingly getting riled up against what they see as betrayal by the GOP, which will inevitably be tilting resources away from him if his candidacy continues to appear doomed, and threatening to spoil their ballots down-ticket.
That said, for the Dems to get the House back would need a seriously big swing, and there may be a little bit of government-restraining ticket splitting.
Trump is actually ahead in some polls. Still, we all believe in poll averages and ignore the ones which don't fit what we want, right? #Brexit
The underlying failure of the polls in the EU referendum was that it picked up on a lot of Leave voters, but down-weighted them. The underlyings in the US Presidential election don't look like that at all, they all pick up far more Democrat voters than Republican ones.
Indeed, if anything, they are upweighting Republicans.
Yes, that's becoming the central polling difficulty. It's not that they can't pick up a representative sample, but that people's turnout behaviour varies from election to election. FWIW I think the UK polls are now downweighting Labour too much because of the pattern of young/urban Labour voters not voting or even not registering - both of which have to some extent been addressed by Corbyn enthusiasm among the young and by the serious all-party registration push before the referendm.
In the US, it's easy to imagine a lot of GOP voters staying at home. One factor which David's excellent article doesn't mention is that media coverage is overwhelmingly about the top of the ticket - I have a politics-aware friend who doesn't even know who the candidates are in her House race.
Pray, Nick, what was the level of millenial voting in the referendum????? And this was an election that was 'ABOUT OUR FUTURE' and 'OUR LIBERAL VALUES'.
For anyone interested ... He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
One aspect of Brexit that is sad is how some people are becoming very American in how they use the word "patriot" in politics.
Sad to you, maybe.
There is little patriotic in elected representatives giving away the power entrusted to them by the people.
And if that failed to crucify us, what then U boats to sink our merchant shipping throttling our trade and the luftwaffe to flatten the city of London? I seem to recall that this didnt work last time either. We just said get stuffed and carried on.
Its not us with 50% youth unemployment, negative interest rates, fascist parties on the verge of winning elections, confiscation of savers money from banks and huge banks on the verge of collapse.
When in a crumbling greenhouse it is most advisable not to throw stone
I have always believed that it was the Yanks who won WW2 - and indeed WW1. Please explain to me where I have gone wrong.
In those terms we unquestionably won world war 1 (yanks were useful but by no means essential) and Russia World War 2 (us and the yanks just stopped the warsaw pact bloc extending to the english channel).
The point is that bazzer (and I fear the EU) wholly misunderstand the British psyche which is to tolerate the most dreadful privations with even a small measure of relish if the alternative is an outsider running their affairs - however benignly. And seek to repay them a hundredfold for such privations.
I am not really trying to express an view on how Britain might react if the EU crucified us in a deal - from the EU's point of view, I guess the stoicism of our reaction does not matter a jot. As long as we are seen to be financially kneecapped in the eyes of other member states, that would be the important thing.
All I want to do really is try to challennge the cosy/smug confidence on here that it is utterly inevitable that the EU will give us a cosy / cushy deal, as it so overwhelmingly in the EU's vital interest to do so (according to some contributors on here).
If I was looking on from Paris or Warsaw, for example, I would be sick and tired of the Brits by now. Screwing them in the negotiation would be mildly satisfying and probably the course of action I would choose as most likely to serve my nation's long-term economic interest, even if it carried a temporary bill of 1.5% EU GDP caused by an export dip. Just think of getting my hands on those lucrative financial services jobs and tax revenues for starters...that would far outweigh the lost 1.5% of EU GDP long term...what a relief those imbecilic self-indulgent Brits have just voted to give up having any further say or influence in the rule-making, so we can regulate them into oblivion finally and get back the temples of high finance we should have never allowed the Anglo Saxons to dominate in the first place...
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
My impression is that he's not very popular with Con MPs.
P.s. I also forgot leadership - the allied leadership systems allowed more independent action (at strategic level) whereas the Germans were increasingly hampered by one man's erratic and controlling ways. However at battlefield level it was considered the German setup was superior.
Mr. B2, what about the war at sea? The battle of the Atlantic in the period before spring 1943 had some very dodgy times. If things had gone a bit more adrift in the period '39-'41 then the UK might have been starved into submission before the Sceptics ever entered the war.
I don't think it was inevitable that the allies would have won the war.
There was a chapter in the book about that, I think, but it's a while since i have read it. I think the conclusion was that Britain could have fought on from the empire and wait for the Americans and Russians,
Anyhow it is a good book. - clear well-written and thoughtful analysis. It's quite high level so glosses over a lot of detail, but that also makes its conclusions easier to follow. Very good reviews on Amazon.
Edit/ I think the inevitability arises from the significant and growing flaws on the German side, which sooner or later would lead to downfall (and, indeed, Downfall).
Besides, as all PB'ers know, a coalition is always best.... ;-)
The only possible counter factual which might have led to a German victory would have been our losing the Battle of Britain, I think. Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible. That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster. Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
For anyone interested ... He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
One aspect of Brexit that is sad is how some people are becoming very American in how they use the word "patriot" in politics.
Sad to you, maybe.
There is little patriotic in elected representatives giving away the power entrusted to them by the people.
Osborne, Farron, Thingy et al are patriotic...to the EU.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
LOL. 13 years of the Blair/Brown governments and all that brought (including further EU integration and the immigration messes). Years when they could do nothing because they were out of power.
Many would call them traitors, both to the party and the country.
And they won't have been proved 'right' or 'wrong' on the EU until many years after Brexit.
You're looking at what happened, which is not the way to judge here. The intention was to derail Maastricht. Without that we still might have a useful customs union that we'd be happy to be part of.
I'm not an arch Leaver - I object to sovereignty being taken away. My views are not uncommon.
The Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992. They continued causing deep trouble afterwards.
What happened was a natural and predictable result of what they did. Major's government was in trouble and tired; their rebellions just added trouble and made it appear more tired. In so doing, they made a massive Labour victory and further EU integration more inevitable.
The bastards were stupidly reassured by Labour's technical opposition to Maastricht, which was far more based in bringing down the government than any philosphical opposition to the EU project.
The word 'traitor' gets thrown around here too much. But in the case of the bastards, it is probably correct.
Even if Hillary Clinton does win the jackpot, it never lasts. The US Constitution is a thing of remarkable beauty, and is designed to ensure checks and balances. So, 2 years is all she'd get, like Obama.
The Italian system was modelled on it....but unfortunately in a multi party system it all becomes quite messy. That is something Renzi is trying to rectify with his referendum.
Interesting. Certainly 100 seems a high number. Not sure about May falling though. If there is a danger things aren't going her way I am sure she will U-turn and call a GE.
Precisely, and no matter how unpopular her views are with the Guardian reading classes, an election campaign leavened with some suitably jingoistic brexitisms and facing Jeremy Corbyn will give her a 100 majority and a rock solid mandate for the hardest leave she could wish for.
they need to agree what their position is on brexit in any GE campaign, they are struggling to do that. don't underestimate how spooked businesses are about hard brexit and the anti business vibe of the conference don't believe too much of her rhetoric about brexit. It is only rhetoric.
Despite all the above she is 17 points clear in the polls.
I think there are massive similarities between May and Sturgeon in a political sense at the moment. Both are committed to publicly pursuing a policy which they know is fraught with risk, and probably don't at this time know how they are actually going to achieve it. And their public pronouncements are almost entirely made for political purposes, targeted at the most troublesome elements of their electoral support, and cannot reliably be assumed to be an indicator of what they are actually doing in private.
Trump is actually ahead in some polls. Still, we all believe in poll averages and ignore the ones which don't fit what we want, right? #Brexit
The underlying failure of the polls in the EU referendum was that it picked up on a lot of Leave voters, but down-weighted them. The underlyings in the US Presidential election don't look like that at all, they all pick up far more Democrat voters than Republican ones.
Indeed, if anything, they are upweighting Republicans.
Yes, that's becoming the central polling difficulty. It's not that they can't pick up a representative sample, but that people's turnout behaviour varies from election to election. FWIW I think the UK polls are now downweighting Labour too much because of the pattern of young/urban Labour voters not voting or even not registering - both of which have to some extent been addressed by Corbyn enthusiasm among the young and by the serious all-party registration push before the referendm.
In the US, it's easy to imagine a lot of GOP voters staying at home. One factor which David's excellent article doesn't mention is that media coverage is overwhelmingly about the top of the ticket - I have a politics-aware friend who doesn't even know who the candidates are in her House race.
Pray, Nick, what was the level of millenial voting in the referendum????? And this was an election that was 'ABOUT OUR FUTURE' and 'OUR LIBERAL VALUES'.
*innocent face*
The problem for the registration bit is that these young people will drop off again when they move, which they do frequently. So by GE 2019/20 the EU Ref boost will surely have been lost again.
For anyone interested I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power. In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
One aspect of Brexit that is sad is how some people are becoming very American in how they use the word "patriot" in politics.
There is enough in British history to generate pride whether your politics are right, centre or left (remember how that Tory MP described the London 2012 opening ceremony as "lefty crap"?)
And excessive nationalism has always been a double edged sword.
@NickPalmer.....it's very dangerous to start thinking that the Labour poll rating is being underestimated. That is as deluded as Corbyn saying his movement will mop up all the non voters to sweep Labour to victory.
Corbyn, and his style of politics have no mainstream tradition in England, and certainly no possible leverage with the over 35's.
The biggest failure of the Dems is that they failed completely and utterly to take advantage of the 5 years of coalition ( successful) government. It of course was something they yearned for over many years but was Brownistic insofar they strived for power but had no idea what to do with it when they finally achieved that aim.
They distanced themselves a few months before from the coalition and as such proved they were great at keeping the local toilets open but failed miserably to deal with the Westminster sewer system.......and unfit for government ....ever
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
LOL. 13 years of the Blair/Brown governments and all that brought (including further EU integration and the immigration messes). Years when they could do nothing because they were out of power.
Many would call them traitors, both to the party and the country.
And they won't have been proved 'right' or 'wrong' on the EU until many years after Brexit.
You're looking at what happened, which is not the way to judge here. The intention was to derail Maastricht. Without that we still might have a useful customs union that we'd be happy to be part of.
I'm not an arch Leaver - I object to sovereignty being taken away. My views are not uncommon.
The Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992. They continued causing deep trouble afterwards.
What happened was a natural and predictable result of what they did. Major's government was in trouble and tired; their rebellions just added trouble and made it appear more tired. In so doing, they made a massive Labour victory and further EU integration more inevitable.
The bastards were stupidly reassured by Labour's technical opposition to Maastricht, which was far more based in bringing down the government than any philosphical opposition to the EU project.
The word 'traitor' gets thrown around here too much. But in the case of the bastards, it is probably correct.
And after the who-har created, and perhaps more specifically the Danish NO to Maastricht, us falling out of the Eternal Recession Mechanism was the best thing that happened to our constitutional arrangement.
John Rentoul Retweeted Mr Memory @AmIRightSir 15m15 minutes ago The 1964 general election took place on this day - result: Lab 317 (44.1%), Con (incl Unionists + Nat Libs) 304 (43.4%), Lib 9 (11.2%)
''This is getting silly now. What chance we don't know who will be the next president before the end of the year?''
I wonder whether America is becoming ungovernable. It's difficult to conceive of a leader who could bridge the chasm between Trump supporters and those of Clinton in the future. There is no healing the divide that this election has exposed.
''This is getting silly now. What chance we don't know who will be the next president before the end of the year?''
I wonder whether America is becoming ungovernable. It's difficult to conceive of a leader who could bridge the chasm between Trump supporters and those of Clinton in the future. There is no healing the divide that this election has exposed.
Aren't you making an assumption that all Trump voters and Trump supporters and vice versa?
An interesting point but there may be a crucial difference in the point that matters now.
Sturgeon's advantage is that the Scottish people decided overwhelmingly in the referendum to place economics and prosperity before restricting immigration. That is also Sturgeon's view.
However the English people decided by a narrow majority to place restricting immigration before economics and prosperity. That could be May's view although she was nominally for the opposite in the referendum.
The only possible counter factual which might have led to a German victory would have been our losing the Battle of Britain, I think. Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible. That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster. Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
A German victory in the Battle of Britain might have lost them the war, or at the very least settled the war more on our terms. There were big arguments between the various branches in the German forces over the invasion: the Luftwaffe were generally cautious because of the loss in the BoB. If they were emboldened, then it might have swung it towards an invasion.
But the Royal Navy were still undefeated, and the British army on the mainland was short of kit but strong in manpower. Even with moderate air superiority, they would have found the mainland a hard egg to crack.
So we reach the question of what would have happened if a German invasion of the UK had been attempted with air superiority but failed. It would have been the first major defeat for the Germans during the war. Would they have tried again, or decided that it would be best to try to get a deal with a battered UK?
For anyone interested ... He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show. Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals. Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that. I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
One aspect of Brexit that is sad is how some people are becoming very American in how they use the word "patriot" in politics.
Sad to you, maybe.
There is little patriotic in elected representatives giving away the power entrusted to them by the people.
Can you please confirm that, in order to be a patriot, it is first necessary to be a right-winger?
Miss Lass, the problem with the economy line for the SNP is that they want to leave a union with which they conduct 60% of trade for one with which they conduct 15% of trade.
And that's without getting into the currency question.
The only possible counter factual which might have led to a German victory would have been our losing the Battle of Britain, I think. Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible. That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster. Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
A German victory in the Battle of Britain might have lost them the war, or at the very least settled the war more on our terms. There were big arguments between the various branches in the German forces over the invasion: the Luftwaffe were generally cautious because of the loss in the BoB. If they were emboldened, then it might have swung it towards an invasion.
But the Royal Navy were still undefeated, and the British army on the mainland was short of kit but strong in manpower. Even with moderate air superiority, they would have found the mainland a hard egg to crack.
So we reach the question of what would have happened if a German invasion of the UK had been attempted with air superiority but failed. It would have been the first major defeat for the Germans during the war. Would they have tried again, or decided that it would be best to try to get a deal with a battered UK?
No, my counter factual was Britsh capitulation prior to any land invasion. Unlikely, as I said, but not impossible.
The only possible counter factual which might have led to a German victory would have been our losing the Battle of Britain, I think. Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible. That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster. Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
A German victory in the Battle of Britain might have lost them the war, or at the very least settled the war more on our terms. There were big arguments between the various branches in the German forces over the invasion: the Luftwaffe were generally cautious because of the loss in the BoB. If they were emboldened, then it might have swung it towards an invasion.
But the Royal Navy were still undefeated, and the British army on the mainland was short of kit but strong in manpower. Even with moderate air superiority, they would have found the mainland a hard egg to crack.
So we reach the question of what would have happened if a German invasion of the UK had been attempted with air superiority but failed. It would have been the first major defeat for the Germans during the war. Would they have tried again, or decided that it would be best to try to get a deal with a battered UK?
Wasn't Barbarossa almost a success? I seem to dimly recall that they were so close to Moscow that Stalin had a train in steam at the station waiting to whisk him away at one point. At last minute he changed his mind and fought on.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
LOL. 13 years of the Blair/Brown governments and all that brought (including further EU integration and the immigration messes). Years when they could do nothing because they were out of power.
Many would call them traitors, both to the party and the country.
And they won't have been proved 'right' or 'wrong' on the EU until many years after Brexit.
You're looking at what happened, which is not the way to judge here. The intention was to derail Maastricht. Without that we still might have a useful customs union that we'd be happy to be part of.
I'm not an arch Leaver - I object to sovereignty being taken away. My views are not uncommon.
The Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992. They continued causing deep trouble afterwards.
What happened was a natural and predictable result of what they did. Major's government was in trouble and tired; their rebellions just added trouble and made it appear more tired. In so doing, they made a massive Labour victory and further EU integration more inevitable.
The bastards were stupidly reassured by Labour's technical opposition to Maastricht, which was far more based in bringing down the government than any philosphical opposition to the EU project.
The word 'traitor' gets thrown around here too much. But in the case of the bastards, it is probably correct.
And after the who-har created, and perhaps more specifically the Danish NO to Maastricht, us falling out of the Eternal Recession Mechanism was the best thing that happened to our constitutional arrangement.
Yep; Patriots.
No, traitors. For the reasons given above.
It's odd that you consider 13 years of Labour government and further EU integration as being any way a success of theirs.
An interesting point but there may be a crucial difference in the point that matters now.
Sturgeon's advantage is that the Scottish people decided overwhelmingly in the referendum to place economics and prosperity before restricting immigration. That is also Sturgeon's view.
However the English people decided by a narrow majority to place restricting immigration before economics and prosperity. That could be May's view although she was nominally for the opposite in the referendum.
I think Sturgeons's hand is better.
Totally wrong... You showed your petticoat there. Please get this correct once and for all as you sound like the winging moaning Scot we have all come to love
It was the English AND THE WELSH !!!
Odd that the Scots did not vote for independence though when they had the chance. Very sensible the Scots though...... Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Edit - another one who doesn't accept a majority when they don't win and totally wrong on the reason that vote went the way it did.
''The word 'traitor' gets thrown around here too much. But in the case of the bastards, it is probably correct.''
It was the ERM fiasco that did for the Major government. It destroyed the tories' reputation for economic competence and allowed Blair to park his tanks on the tory lawn.
I don;t think the bast*rds were that important either way.
The tories might have lost by less if Ken Clarke had started to share the fruits of the rapidly reviving economy by slashing taxes in 1996. He didn't. The tories were slaughtered.
Two of the three eldest SCOTUS judges are on the liberal wing - Ginsburg and (I think) Breyer. If the Democrats gain the Senate at least one of them is certain to step down. As David says, that could lead to a liberal majority. If both go, the likelihood is that HRC will nominate one more centrist judge, as convention demands a level of balance. If the Democrats gain the House - unlikely, but possible - they will get the chance to undo the district boundaries the Republicans gerrymandered and will then gerrymander their own. The stakes are very big indeed.
I think you're right, the Dems will nominate a centrist but it wasn't a courtesy Bush2 offered when he nominated Alito and Roberts? It always seems to be the Dems who are expected to give ground.
Don't forget Obama has just offered them a Centrist and they have chosen to whine about illegitimacy and generally blow hard.
Bush replaced two conservative judges with two conservative judges. Obama replaced two liberal judges with two liberal judges.
Scalia was a conservative judge, which is why his replacement is contentious.
Garland may not have been as reliably conservative as Scalia, but he was still of the right. He was a much better pick for them than what they will get if Hillary holds the senate. Ergo they've likely been outmanoeuvred.
An interesting point but there may be a crucial difference in the point that matters now.
Sturgeon's advantage is that the Scottish people decided overwhelmingly in the referendum to place economics and prosperity before restricting immigration. That is also Sturgeon's view.
However the English people decided by a narrow majority to place restricting immigration before economics and prosperity. That could be May's view although she was nominally for the opposite in the referendum.
I think Sturgeons's hand is better.
I wasn't making a point about who's hand was technically "better". Although a counter-argument would be that the Scots need more persuading on economic arguments vs "control". Which is a problem for Sturgeon as she still has an obstacle of a referendum to get past (if she really wants independence). A referendum which then, as in the future, is fundamentally about economics vs control. However much "access to the (EU) single market" is talked up as important, it pales into insignificance compared with access to the (UK) single market.
Whereas Brexit has already passed the British people.
''This is getting silly now. What chance we don't know who will be the next president before the end of the year?''
I wonder whether America is becoming ungovernable. It's difficult to conceive of a leader who could bridge the chasm between Trump supporters and those of Clinton in the future. There is no healing the divide that this election has exposed.
Very little chance. Clinton will comfortably clear 270 (or 271).
This is getting silly now. What chance we don't know who will be the next president before the end of the year?
Someone at Betfair might have a very big call to make on November 9th, with a <£100m market and an uncertain result. </p>
If ever there was a year when electors, on either side, break ranks, this is it!
Betfair settle on the election result, not votes cast in the Electoral college. Unless there's no majority from the election.
Betfair are planning to settle the market the day after the election, based on the States' declared results. They did think to specifically exclude 'faithless electors', but with various possibilities of manoeuvres afterwards there's a chance they could settle for the 'wrong' winner if it's as close as 2000 was.
Two of the three eldest SCOTUS judges are on the liberal wing - Ginsburg and (I think) Breyer. If the Democrats gain the Senate at least one of them is certain to step down. As David says, that could lead to a liberal majority. If both go, the likelihood is that HRC will nominate one more centrist judge, as convention demands a level of balance. If the Democrats gain the House - unlikely, but possible - they will get the chance to undo the district boundaries the Republicans gerrymandered and will then gerrymander their own. The stakes are very big indeed.
I think you're right, the Dems will nominate a centrist but it wasn't a courtesy Bush2 offered when he nominated Alito and Roberts? It always seems to be the Dems who are expected to give ground.
Don't forget Obama has just offered them a Centrist and they have chosen to whine about illegitimacy and generally blow hard.
Bush replaced two conservative judges with two conservative judges. Obama replaced two liberal judges with two liberal judges.
Scalia was a conservative judge, which is why his replacement is contentious.
The judges hold off on dying until their own side is in power?
Or retire.
Hence why Scalia's unexpected death put the cat among the pigeons.
P.s. I also forgot leadership - the allied leadership systems allowed more independent action (at strategic level) whereas the Germans were increasingly hampered by one man's erratic and controlling ways. However at battlefield level it was considered the German setup was superior.
Mr. B2, what about the war at sea? The battle of the Atlantic in the period before spring 1943 had some very dodgy times. If things had gone a bit more adrift in the period '39-'41 then the UK might have been starved into submission before the Sceptics ever entered the war.
I don't think it was inevitable that the allies would have won the war.
There was a chapter in the book about that, I think, but it's a while since i have read it. I think the conclusion was that Britain could have fought on from the empire and wait for the Americans and Russians,
Anyhow it is a good book. - clear well-written and thoughtful analysis. It's quite high level so glosses over a lot of detail, but that also makes its conclusions easier to follow. Very good reviews on Amazon.
Edit/ I think the inevitability arises from the significant and growing flaws on the German side, which sooner or later would lead to downfall (and, indeed, Downfall).
Besides, as all PB'ers know, a coalition is always best.... ;-)
The only possible counter factual which might have led to a German victory would have been our losing the Battle of Britain, I think. Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible. That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster. Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
An invasion across the Channel was always going to be an enormous ask for the Germans (not just the military crossing - for example where were German tanks going to get fuel from?) - look at how long we had to prepare and how much effort D Day took some years later, with more resources, better technology, and complete domination of the seas and the skies.
A more credible scenario is if the Conservatives who were pressing for a peace deal with Hitler after Dunkirk had won the argument.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
Major's government was destroyed by its own incompetence, exhaustion and sleeze.
End of story.
All governments have had a few backbenchers rebelling and Major's was no different.
But its not the rebelling backbenchers which bring down governments but the incompetence, exhaustion and sleeze of those governments.
What is different is that some people have an obsession about shifting blame from where it belongs - the incompetence, exhaustion and sleeze of the Major government - to where it doesn't - a few backbenchers who 99% of voters weren't aware of.
This is getting silly now. What chance we don't know who will be the next president before the end of the year?
Someone at Betfair might have a very big call to make on November 9th, with a <£100m market and an uncertain result. </p>
If ever there was a year when electors, on either side, break ranks, this is it!
Quite. The whole concept of electors seems barmy from the outside, but I guess every country has its own constitutional foibles - in the UK we just changed PM without an election, and we still have a House of Lords, yet life goes on.
Trump is actually ahead in some polls. Still, we all believe in poll averages and ignore the ones which don't fit what we want, right? #Brexit
The underlying failure of the polls in the EU referendum was that it picked up on a lot of Leave voters, but down-weighted them. The underlyings in the US Presidential election don't look like that at all, they all pick up far more Democrat voters than Republican ones.
Indeed, if anything, they are upweighting Republicans.
Yes, that's becoming the central polling difficulty. It's not that they can't pick up a representative sample, but that people's turnout behaviour varies from election to election. FWIW I think the UK polls are now downweighting Labour too much because of the pattern of young/urban Labour voters not voting or even not registering - both of which have to some extent been addressed by Corbyn enthusiasm among the young and by the serious all-party registration push before the referendm.
In the US, it's easy to imagine a lot of GOP voters staying at home. One factor which David's excellent article doesn't mention is that media coverage is overwhelmingly about the top of the ticket - I have a politics-aware friend who doesn't even know who the candidates are in her House race.
Good Morning Mr Palmer, did you read my post to you last night on the hypocrisy (or not) of politicians educating their children privately or using grammar schools whilst voting to disallow others from doing so?
The only possible counter factual which might have led to a German victory would have been our losing the Battle of Britain, I think. Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible. That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster. Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
A German victory in the Battle of Britain might have lost them the war, or at the very least settled the war more on our terms. There were big arguments between the various branches in the German forces over the invasion: the Luftwaffe were generally cautious because of the loss in the BoB. If they were emboldened, then it might have swung it towards an invasion.
But the Royal Navy were still undefeated, and the British army on the mainland was short of kit but strong in manpower. Even with moderate air superiority, they would have found the mainland a hard egg to crack.
So we reach the question of what would have happened if a German invasion of the UK had been attempted with air superiority but failed. It would have been the first major defeat for the Germans during the war. Would they have tried again, or decided that it would be best to try to get a deal with a battered UK?
Wasn't Barbarossa almost a success? I seem to dimly recall that they were so close to Moscow that Stalin had a train in steam at the station waiting to whisk him away at one point. At last minute he changed his mind and fought on.
I can't remember enough about Stalin's strategy. Certainly I don't think the fall of Moscow would have meant the fall of Russia. IANAE, but from memory they had been moving over 1,500 factories east before the end of 1941. Not all arrived, at all or intact, but it's a sign of how Stalin was wiling to trade space for time. And as they headed east, Germany's lines were getting very long.
And there was more than one precedent for Russia losing Moscow but winning the war.
You had me until 'I believe the May government will fall'
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
"Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it."
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
They were patriots. And they've been proved right.
One aspect of Brexit that is sad is how some people are becoming very American in how they use the word "patriot" in politics.
Sad to you, maybe.
There is little patriotic in elected representatives giving away the power entrusted to them by the people.
Can you please confirm that, in order to be a patriot, it is first necessary to be a right-winger?
In frothland that is indeed the case. It's all about who has the biggest flag. Symbols 'Trump' actions every time.
Comments
The likes of Lammy trying to get the Commons to reject the result, or the lawyer taking the Government to court does not endear them to any of the Leave voters or the majority (I would say) of the Remain voters, who have accepted the democratic decision.
I don't think it was inevitable that the allies would have won the war.
There are many leavers, and even some on here, who say that leaving is worth a financial cost, or in some cases any financial cost to the economy. That is actively wishing the UK ill.
I've just backed David Davis as next conservative leader. 100/1 on Paddy Power.
In my view, Davis is the most credible of the three Brexiteers doing the EU exit. Johnson is a shambles and an embarrassment as foreign secretary. His performance over Russia confirms that. He has been played by May. He cannot shake off his joker persona. He struggles to be taken seriously on Brexit. His actions after the referendum will be played back endlessly, looking awkward at the press conference, the 'have cake and eat it' article in the telegraph, and his mysterious abdication from the leadership campaign. He has no experience of high office, and it is starting to show.
Liam Fox is similar odds to Davis, but he has showed colossal misjudgement in his role. He has insulted businesses and appears essentially clueless about what is involved in making trade deals.
Davis seems to be doing well. The signs to me that his star is rising is reports that attempts by business to lobby the treasury over the terms of EU exit have not met with success, because power is concentrated in the dept for exiting the EU, led by Davis. He has had a lot of experience of government and opposition. He is popular with the grassroots. His leave credentials are unsurpassed. He has also taken a genuinely independent stance on many issues ie human rights/civil liberties and is respected outside of right wing circles.
I believe that the May government will fall. I think they have gone the wrong way about implementing brexit having been bounced in to doing it quickly it by the Leadsom threat. The next conservative leader will need to create a credible response to Brexit. Davis with his current experience is well placed to do that.
I was suprised that 100/1 is available on skybet and paddy power. He is 14/5 at betfair which makes me think this kind these odds wont be around for long.
Not sure what the area is called though.
In the hypothetical scenario of Brexit turning very bad for the UK, it would be the defining event of our generation and influence politics for decades thereafter. Having inflicted the whole thing on us from start to finish I don't see any escape for the Tories.
Tories in power do not voluntarily surrender it. May is popular amongst all but the SDP-tendency headbangers.
And the grassroots love her.
Yes, the battle of the Atlantic was a close-run thing - and my grandfather was there in DEMS service.
But 'starving Britain into submission' is not as easy as might be supposed. Germany still gave stiff resistance at the end of the war, despite horrendous conditions. And German forces would still have had to cross the Channel.
You could equally say: if the French had closed the Ardennes, if the Americans had entered the war earlier (which might actually have happened if the Germans had been more successful in the Atlantic); if Stalin had been more prepared and had not cleansed his military, etc, etc, then Germany may have been defeated sooner.
Hmm, wow. It appears that Hillary Clinton may need to win 271 electoral votes on November 8th to become President. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/washington-elector-hillary-clinton-rejection-229647 …
Anyhow it is a good book. - clear well-written and thoughtful analysis. It's quite high level so glosses over a lot of detail, but that also makes its conclusions easier to follow. Very good reviews on Amazon.
Edit/ I think the inevitability arises from the significant and growing flaws on the German side, which sooner or later would lead to downfall (and, indeed, Downfall).
Besides, as all PB'ers know, a coalition is always best.... ;-)
Tell that to the 'bastards' who destroyed Major's government in the mid-1990s.
It's perfectly possible for it to happen again, and the exact same people who brought down Major and Cameron might do the same for May. If they don't like her version of Brexit, they wouldn't think twice.
Although to be honest, they rarely think once ...
That is just another reason why May needs to run domestic policy at the same time as Brexit. Show we're doing our best at home and trying hardest abroad, and it'll be Remainiacs and EU figureheads who are blamed for a any bad deal.
Are the American electorate sophisticated enough to realise that the best way to neuter an unwanted president is to stuff both the House and Senate with their opponents - which means turning out on the day rather than abstaining?
Many would call them traitors, both to the party and the country.
And they won't have been proved 'right' or 'wrong' on the EU until many years after Brexit.
At the root of it is Heaths terrible error/treason (depending on your point of view) in ramming through entry in parliament - depending on opposition votes to squeak it - and not putting the terms he agreed to a referendum of the UK people BEFORE we joined.
Also any attempt to incorporate us into a political entity with countries who had seriously tried to conquer us within living memory was inevitably doomed to fail
nobody is going to take up arms over Romney they will for trump, especially when they believ and are being told by their chief it is fixed, he has said it many many times. So dangerous.
don't underestimate how spooked businesses are about hard brexit and the anti business vibe of the conference
don't believe too much of her rhetoric about brexit. It is only rhetoric.
"Believe me, she would not be my first choice, that I can tell you. You don't know. That would not be my first choice."
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/301074-trump-defends-himself-against-accusers-by-attacking-their
A few percent of GDP lost now might be very hard to 'recover' in the future: you need much higher growth that previously to undo the damage. We may have recovered in GDP terms from the 2008 crash, but we're still much poorer than we would have been if it had not happened, and a lot of people have suffered.
I've on the record on here in saying that a quick solution to Brexit, even if that means WTO, might be better for the country and economy than a long and convoluted negotiation in which we get little more. So please don't think I'm some form of continuity remain. But leavers should acknowledge that the UK may well be harmed by Brexit, even if they think it'll be worth it in the long run.
Obama replaced two liberal judges with two liberal judges.
Scalia was a conservative judge, which is why his replacement is contentious.
As English, given the relatively large area of Scotland with relatively small population and its strategic value (controlling the whole Island and eliminating the possibility of them allying with a hostile power) I consider the Barnet Tribute and extra powers for their jumped up county council (or as Bevan might put it, stuffing their mouths with Gold) a price well worth paying to keep them in the Union.
A lesson the EU is incapable of learning it seems.
That is icy cold but that is Realpolitik.
May is popular with the selectorate. She would need to either quit or be forced out. I believe that the position with Brexit is untenable and there is no face saving manouvere for her re Article 50.
Someone at Betfair might have a very big call to make on November 9th, with a <£100m market and an uncertain result.
Or is that just locker room banter ?
I'm not an arch Leaver - I object to sovereignty being taken away. My views are not uncommon.
EtA: In safe Kentish lands.
Still, this does give me the opportunity to say again that the US political system is an utter *lusterfuck.
In the US, it's easy to imagine a lot of GOP voters staying at home. One factor which David's excellent article doesn't mention is that media coverage is overwhelmingly about the top of the ticket - I have a politics-aware friend who doesn't even know who the candidates are in her House race.
That said, for the Dems to get the House back would need a seriously big swing, and there may be a little bit of government-restraining ticket splitting.
*innocent face*
There is little patriotic in elected representatives giving away the power entrusted to them by the people.
Hitler's manic philosophy would have meant the invasion of Russia come what may, but the air battle was a close enough run thing that better German tactics could conceivably have won it, and at that stage of the war a British surrender without a land invasion would not have been impossible.
That is the only way I can see that he might have had the resources available - particularly air power - to prevent Barbarossa being a disaster.
Unlikely, but not wholly impossible.
What happened was a natural and predictable result of what they did. Major's government was in trouble and tired; their rebellions just added trouble and made it appear more tired. In so doing, they made a massive Labour victory and further EU integration more inevitable.
The bastards were stupidly reassured by Labour's technical opposition to Maastricht, which was far more based in bringing down the government than any philosphical opposition to the EU project.
The word 'traitor' gets thrown around here too much. But in the case of the bastards, it is probably correct.
The Italian system was modelled on it....but unfortunately in a multi party system it all becomes quite messy. That is something Renzi is trying to rectify with his referendum.
http://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/news/a40002/cat-gifs-hillary-clinton-election/?src=social-email
And excessive nationalism has always been a double edged sword.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_psychology#Color_and_sports_performance
Essentially, those in combative sports such as taekwondo who wear red have a small boost to their chances.
Corbyn, and his style of politics have no mainstream tradition in England, and certainly no possible leverage with the over 35's.
They distanced themselves a few months before from the coalition and as such proved they were great at keeping the local toilets open but failed miserably to deal with the Westminster sewer system.......and unfit for government ....ever
Yep; Patriots.
Mr Memory @AmIRightSir 15m15 minutes ago
The 1964 general election took place on this day - result: Lab 317 (44.1%), Con (incl Unionists + Nat Libs) 304 (43.4%), Lib 9 (11.2%)
I wonder whether America is becoming ungovernable. It's difficult to conceive of a leader who could bridge the chasm between Trump supporters and those of Clinton in the future. There is no healing the divide that this election has exposed.
An interesting point but there may be a crucial difference in the point that matters now.
Sturgeon's advantage is that the Scottish people decided overwhelmingly in the referendum to place economics and prosperity before restricting immigration. That is also Sturgeon's view.
However the English people decided by a narrow majority to place restricting immigration before economics and prosperity. That could be May's view although she was nominally for the opposite in the referendum.
I think Sturgeons's hand is better.
But the Royal Navy were still undefeated, and the British army on the mainland was short of kit but strong in manpower. Even with moderate air superiority, they would have found the mainland a hard egg to crack.
So we reach the question of what would have happened if a German invasion of the UK had been attempted with air superiority but failed. It would have been the first major defeat for the Germans during the war. Would they have tried again, or decided that it would be best to try to get a deal with a battered UK?
And that's without getting into the currency question.
Unlikely, as I said, but not impossible.
It's odd that you consider 13 years of Labour government and further EU integration as being any way a success of theirs.
It was the English AND THE WELSH !!!
Odd that the Scots did not vote for independence though when they had the chance. Very sensible the Scots though...... Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Edit - another one who doesn't accept a majority when they don't win and totally wrong on the reason that vote went the way it did.
It was the ERM fiasco that did for the Major government. It destroyed the tories' reputation for economic competence and allowed Blair to park his tanks on the tory lawn.
I don;t think the bast*rds were that important either way.
The tories might have lost by less if Ken Clarke had started to share the fruits of the rapidly reviving economy by slashing taxes in 1996. He didn't. The tories were slaughtered.
Whereas Brexit has already passed the British people.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/#/politics/event/27713489/market?marketId=1.107373419
A more credible scenario is if the Conservatives who were pressing for a peace deal with Hitler after Dunkirk had won the argument.
End of story.
All governments have had a few backbenchers rebelling and Major's was no different.
But its not the rebelling backbenchers which bring down governments but the incompetence, exhaustion and sleeze of those governments.
What is different is that some people have an obsession about shifting blame from where it belongs - the incompetence, exhaustion and sleeze of the Major government - to where it doesn't - a few backbenchers who 99% of voters weren't aware of.
And there was more than one precedent for Russia losing Moscow but winning the war.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=65Ybzr6QNUY&feature=youtu.be