Within a few years the EU will unravel because politicians have not allowed it to develop gradually. I know no one is taking notice but watch this space.
More generally, this exercise allows us to make the following claims:
421 out of 574 English and Welsh constituencies probably voted to Leave
Of these, 270 English and Welsh constituencies almost definitely voted to Leave
152 constituencies probably voted to Remain.
Of these, half (76) almost definitely voted to Remain.
12 SNP Definite Remains? Surely be definition it must be 54 SNP Remains?
Something's up as the table doesn't add up to 650.
It wouldn't as Speaker/NI/Green etc aren't in the table. But the SNP row should add up to 54 and should almost all be Definite Remain (I could understand a tiny number being Probable Remain).
It's about a hundred under.
From his work
"Bear in mind that these results apply only to England, Wales, and selected Scottish seats."
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
At the time we turned our backs on the Treaty of Rome the first time around in 1958, the two main parties were led by Harold Macmillan and Hugh Gaitskell.
Now we have Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, so any comparison with that period is unwarranted.
More generally, this exercise allows us to make the following claims:
421 out of 574 English and Welsh constituencies probably voted to Leave
Of these, 270 English and Welsh constituencies almost definitely voted to Leave
152 constituencies probably voted to Remain.
Of these, half (76) almost definitely voted to Remain.
12 SNP Definite Remains? Surely be definition it must be 54 SNP Remains?
Something's up as the table doesn't add up to 650.
It wouldn't as Speaker/NI/Green etc aren't in the table. But the SNP row should add up to 54 and should almost all be Definite Remain (I could understand a tiny number being Probable Remain).
It's about a hundred under.
From his work
"Bear in mind that these results apply only to England, Wales, and selected Scottish seats."
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
That was bad. Did she apologize?
Not as far as I've seen. I *hate* her with a deep passion because of it.
Being a man looking after a toddler can be hard. Amongst the vast majority of lovely people, you occasionally get questions like "why did you give up work?" or "Is your wife ill?" Comments such as hers help makes it worse.
Fortunately, a couple of our friends have since made the same decision. I'm a trend-setter.
There's another point as well. Sadly, many children are raised without a father at home. They then attend schools where, especially at primary school, male authority figures are a rarity. We need more men looking after children.
It's also very good for equality. It's also great fun, and I'd recommend it to any male PB reader. Take at least a year off. Yes, nappies are smelly, but I'd take a tonne of nappies over seeing our child's first smile, or his first step.
I've taken to lying, so Mrs J says: "Oh! He's just taken a step." I respond. "Wow! Has he?"
Oddly, women I talk to do the same thing for their husbands ...
Fair play to you sir. I regret that I wasn't able to do likewise. Your point about male role models at school is sound. My son - extremely unusually - has had two male primary school teachers in three years. They are still way too rare.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
At the time we turned our backs on the Treaty of Rome the first time around in 1958, the two main parties were led by Harold Macmillan and Hugh Gaitskell.
Now we have Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, so any comparison with that period is unwarranted.
She said men should not be hired as nannies as they might be paedophiles.
"As an employer we’re not, let’s face it, most of us don’t employ men as nannies, most of us don’t. Now you can call that sexist, I call that cautious and very sensible when you look at the stats.
Not that cautious to admit publicly that's what you're doing, let alone encourage others to do it, considering that it's unlawful direct discrimination in the terms of the Equality Act.
I'd like to know if she applied the same caution to her own husband. After all, he's male, and you never know ...
Getting awfully close in TX. I need a long odds hedge against a Trump win but this just seems insane?
The trend line from several pollsters put TX within the MoE and clearly the demographics of the state are moving blue. However I would be surprised if Clinton came within 5 points. That said she has added an ad spend to the state.
Out of interest, how many Tory MPs have seats in areas that voted Remain? If the LDs are doing well in Witney by making Brexit the central issue, that's potentially a significant warning sign for May should she be thinking about seeking a hard Brexit mandate - especially if UKIP's implosion means that Labour is safe in its heartlands.
About 55, I'd say. But the main game remains Con vs Lab. The number of Tories who are really angry about Brexit is quite limited, as far as I can tell.
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
That was bad. Did she apologize?
Not as far as I've seen. I *hate* her with a deep passion because of it.
Being a man looking after a toddler can be hard. Amongst the vast majority of lovely people, you occasionally get questions like "why did you give up work?" or "Is your wife ill?" Comments such as hers help makes it worse.
Fortunately, a couple of our friends have since made the same decision. I'm a trend-setter.
There's another point as well. Sadly, many children are raised without a father at home. They then attend schools where, especially at primary school, male authority figures are a rarity. We need more men looking after children.
It's also very good for equality. It's also great fun, and I'd recommend it to any male PB reader. Take at least a year off. Yes, nappies are smelly, but I'd take a tonne of nappies over seeing our child's first smile, or his first step.
I've taken to lying, so Mrs J says: "Oh! He's just taken a step." I respond. "Wow! Has he?"
Oddly, women I talk to do the same thing for their husbands ...
Fair play to you sir. I regret that I wasn't able to do likewise. Your point about male role models at school is sound. My son - extremely unusually - has had two male primary school teachers in three years. They are still way too rare.
And they'll be rarer still with people like the loathsome Leadsom about (sorry, Casino Royale). IMO that should really have been the headline story from her interview, not the vile mothers rubbish.
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
That was bad. Did she apologize?
Not as far as I've seen. I *hate* her with a deep passion because of it.
Being a man looking after a toddler can be hard. Amongst the vast majority of lovely people, you occasionally get questions like "why did you give up work?" or "Is your wife ill?" Comments such as hers help makes it worse.
Fortunately, a couple of our friends have since made the same decision. I'm a trend-setter.
There's another point as well. Sadly, many children are raised without a father at home. They then attend schools where, especially at primary school, male authority figures are a rarity. We need more men looking after children.
It's also very good for equality. It's also great fun, and I'd recommend it to any male PB reader. Take at least a year off. Yes, nappies are smelly, but I'd take a tonne of nappies over seeing our child's first smile, or his first step.
I've taken to lying, so Mrs J says: "Oh! He's just taken a step." I respond. "Wow! Has he?"
Oddly, women I talk to do the same thing for their husbands ...
Good for you.
People should do whatever works best for them and their families.
Mean spirited, small-minded busy-bodies should mind their own business.
Eh? Heathrow is the busiest two-runway airport in the world - by far. Gatwick is the busiest single runway airport in the world*. Stansted is in a shit location and has struggled to grow. Luton and London City? Whatever.
Anyway, just because growth is less does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that there is no need for a new runway. The need remains immediate, and is acute. I conclude that Faisal is a moron.
* Used to be by far, but now being chased by Mumbai, which although it technically has two runways, can only use one at a time as they cross each other. Also, Mumbai Airport still uses BOM as its code, which is marvellous.
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
I can understand why you feel strongly. I don't agree with her view, and I note it was from the same disastrous interview that led to her withdrawing from the Conservative race, but I think it was naivety rather than malice.
When the EU collapses we will realise we were right to get out
Christ, how long have we been hearing about the EU and Euro collapsing.
The eurocrats just about kept the show on the road after the 2008 crash but for a while it was "touch and go" and I've seen nothing to suggest the next crash (whenever it is) won't be just as touch and go because the inherent flaws in the whole project are still the same.
I assume having rumbled that they entered the country on false pretenses and intending to subvert the system we promptly threw them out again ? No ? Thought not.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
I am reaching the reluctant and mournful conclusion that Andrea Leadsom would have been BETTER than Theresa May.
And Boris would have been better still. He might have exploded the country but at least he'd be amusing.
I've always liked Andrea Leadsom.
Andrea Leadsom is a poisonous, misandric witch. The sooner she leaves parliament the better.
What a nasty post.
No, it's reasonable.
She said men should not be hired as nannies as they might be paedophiles.
"As an employer we’re not, let’s face it, most of us don’t employ men as nannies, most of us don’t. Now you can call that sexist, I call that cautious and very sensible when you look at the stats.
“Your odds are stacked against you if you employ a man. We know paedophiles are attracted to working with children. I’m sorry but they’re the facts.”
I am reaching the reluctant and mournful conclusion that Andrea Leadsom would have been BETTER than Theresa May.
And Boris would have been better still. He might have exploded the country but at least he'd be amusing.
I've always liked Andrea Leadsom.
Andrea Leadsom is a poisonous, misandric witch. The sooner she leaves parliament the better.
What a nasty post.
No, it's reasonable.
She said men should not be hired as nannies as they might be paedophiles.
"As an employer we’re not, let’s face it, most of us don’t employ men as nannies, most of us don’t. Now you can call that sexist, I call that cautious and very sensible when you look at the stats.
“Your odds are stacked against you if you employ a man. We know paedophiles are attracted to working with children. I’m sorry but they’re the facts.”
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
I can understand why you feel strongly. I don't agree with her view, and I note it was from the same disastrous interview that led to her withdrawing from the Conservative race, but I think it was naivety rather than malice.
She's an MP FFS.
It's more than naivety. Leaving aside the general sh*tness of what she said, it's also illegal for employers to do as she suggests.
Eh? Heathrow is the busiest two-runway airport in the world - by far. Gatwick is the busiest single runway airport in the world*. Stansted is in a shit location and has struggled to grow. Luton and London City? Whatever.
Anyway, just because growth is less does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that there is no need for a new runway. The need remains immediate, and is acute. I conclude that Faisal is a moron.
* Used to be by far, but now being chased by Mumbai, which although it technically has two runways, can only use one at a time as they cross each other. Also, Mumbai Airport still uses BOM as its code, which is marvellous.
I am reaching the reluctant and mournful conclusion that Andrea Leadsom would have been BETTER than Theresa May.
And Boris would have been better still. He might have exploded the country but at least he'd be amusing.
I've always liked Andrea Leadsom.
Andrea Leadsom is a poisonous, misandric witch. The sooner she leaves parliament the better.
What a nasty post.
No, it's reasonable.
She said men should not be hired as nannies as they might be paedophiles.
"As an employer we’re not, let’s face it, most of us don’t employ men as nannies, most of us don’t. Now you can call that sexist, I call that cautious and very sensible when you look at the stats.
“Your odds are stacked against you if you employ a man. We know paedophiles are attracted to working with children. I’m sorry but they’re the facts.”
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
The trouble is that if we had the self-belief, we would be using our influence to reshape Europe at a pivotal moment, not turning our backs on it. Brexit and a self-confident Britain in 2016 are mutually exclusive concepts.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Synthetic biology, which the EU - through Its Directive 18 (2001) - essentially bans or makes simply too difficult to do in the EU.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
I agree. There's bound to be a little unease, as happens when a child takes the stabilisers off his bike. But we can cycle without them. (*)
However, success is not guaranteed either. It's why I've been a little disMAYed by our new PM's first few months. She's not being pushy (aggressive?) enough.
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
I can understand why you feel strongly. I don't agree with her view, and I note it was from the same disastrous interview that led to her withdrawing from the Conservative race, but I think it was naivety rather than malice.
She's an MP FFS.
Just because someone's an MP doesn't mean they can't hold all sorts of dotty views and opinions. In fact given the "odd" characters politics attracts in general I'd say the amount of MP's away with fairies is probably above the national average...
Eh? Heathrow is the busiest two-runway airport in the world - by far. Gatwick is the busiest single runway airport in the world*. Stansted is in a shit location and has struggled to grow. Luton and London City? Whatever.
Anyway, just because growth is less does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that there is no need for a new runway. The need remains immediate, and is acute. I conclude that Faisal is a moron.
* Used to be by far, but now being chased by Mumbai, which although it technically has two runways, can only use one at a time as they cross each other. Also, Mumbai Airport still uses BOM as its code, which is marvellous.
Don't worry, he is going to further outline his argument in the next 11 tweets.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
The trouble is that if we had the self-belief, we would be using our influence to reshape Europe at a pivotal moment, not turning our backs on it. Brexit and a self-confident Britain in 2016 are mutually exclusive concepts.
How many times have we heard that tune over decades? The EU is unreformable.
Now, we have no excuses, we are fully in control and the world is our oyster.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
The trouble is that if we had the self-belief, we would be using our influence to reshape Europe at a pivotal moment, not turning our backs on it. Brexit and a self-confident Britain in 2016 are mutually exclusive concepts.
Completely disagreed. We did try to reshape Europe but they didn't listen so a self-confident Britain is walking away from a project that doesn't suit us and embracing a new world instead.
If Britain lacked self-confidence we'd still be in Europe as we'd cling to nurse.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
At the time we turned our backs on the Treaty of Rome the first time around in 1958, the two main parties were led by Harold Macmillan and Hugh Gaitskell.
Now we have Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, so any comparison with that period is unwarranted.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
I agree. There's bound to be a little unease, as happens when a child takes the stabilisers off his bike. But we can cycle without them. (*)
However, success is not guaranteed either. It's why I've been a little disMAYed by our new PM's first few months. She's not being pushy (aggressive?) enough.
(*) Worst. Analogy. Ever.
Within the admittedly poor parameters of PB, it's not as bad an analogy as you suggest.
Theresa Maybe is like the weak willed father who never pushes his child on the bike without stabilisers, for fear his child might fall and be hurt.
It's a short step from that to people querying why I, a male, gave up work to look after a toddler. Nudge, nudge.
She's sick and unfit for parliament.
I can understand why you feel strongly. I don't agree with her view, and I note it was from the same disastrous interview that led to her withdrawing from the Conservative race, but I think it was naivety rather than malice.
She's an MP FFS.
It's more than naivety. Leaving aside the general sh*tness of what she said, it's also illegal for employers to do as she suggests.
Why do you like her?
She also said she had employed a male nanny for over five years after those remarks came out and said she doesn't think that men, or fathers, shouldn't be nannies.
It was the one interview. I would look for a pattern of behaviour. I think she does have a passion for child development, feels it personally, and not always logically, was under a lot of stress at that time and not thinking clearly. Also, clearly, the Times were looking to help skewer her leadership bid. As were many other Tories.
I like her natural, warm, personable style. I liked her performance on the Treasury select committees, when she grilled Bob Diamond, her standing up to George Osborne, her performance in the ITV debate, her leadership of the Fresh Start group and she put in a good performance on the Open Europe wargames on the EU renegotiation.
I certainly don't think she deserves the opprobrium heaped on her since, which I think is as much about her social conservatism as anything else.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
The trouble is that if we had the self-belief, we would be using our influence to reshape Europe at a pivotal moment, not turning our backs on it. Brexit and a self-confident Britain in 2016 are mutually exclusive concepts.
Agree with that.
My biggest fear is that we lack the confidence to stare down our own issues and address them.
The constituency for a delusional Daily Mail view of the world seems too large.
If we and our political class were honest about our educational, productivity, regional imbalances and industrial issues, I'd have confidence in our ability to fix them.
But we prefer to grizzle about asylum seekers, "Europe", and immigrants on one side, (and the privatisation of the NHS, Black Lives Matter, and Palestine on the other").
Not sure what it would take for "Tory Britain", by which I mean a complacent and outdated view of Britain's role in the world, to be shaken.
For those who want a bit of depressing reading from the NYRB: the decline in British industry since the 1950s, and how Brexit will make it worse.
Apparently we export only marginally more goods than BELGIUM.
I like the start of this article:
"It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the disaster the British people have inflicted upon themselves with their decision to leave the European Union, taken in the referendum last June."
I haven't read a single article in liberal New York media which attempts to explain to readers WHY Brexit happened, other than "xenophobia".
The sovereignty issue is simply ignored.
This could be briskly remedied by asking Americans how they would feel if the US Supreme Court sat in Mexico City, and conducted proceedings, and gave its rulings, solely in Spanish, as is the case with the ECJ and French.
Your last analogy is something of a stretch, to put it mildly, but I agree that there is an element of New York gloating about Brexit. London had completely eclipsed New York as THE world city. The feeling stateside is that Brexit will redress the balance. Maybe. It will be one of the saddest consequences of London's enforced departure from the Single Market.
There are some economists who are saying that Hillary would wish she had not been made President as the dollar is soon to be supplanted by other currencies which will be only one of the problems she will face.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
The trouble is that if we had the self-belief, we would be using our influence to reshape Europe at a pivotal moment, not turning our backs on it. Brexit and a self-confident Britain in 2016 are mutually exclusive concepts.
Completely disagreed. We did try to reshape Europe but they didn't listen so a self-confident Britain is walking away from a project that doesn't suit us and embracing a new world instead.
If Britain lacked self-confidence we'd still be in Europe as we'd cling to nurse.
We had some success in shaping regulations in the single market on the energy market and some liberalisation of competition in telecoms, nudging for trade, together with many failures.
Politically, our EU reform efforts (assuming they were ever sincere, despite the spin back home) to decentralise and prevent further integration were all failures.
For those who want a bit of depressing reading from the NYRB: the decline in British industry since the 1950s, and how Brexit will make it worse.
Apparently we export only marginally more goods than BELGIUM.
I like the start of this article:
"It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the disaster the British people have inflicted upon themselves with their decision to leave the European Union, taken in the referendum last June."
I haven't read a single article in liberal New York media which attempts to explain to readers WHY Brexit happened, other than "xenophobia".
The sovereignty issue is simply ignored.
This could be briskly remedied by asking Americans how they would feel if the US Supreme Court sat in Mexico City, and conducted proceedings, and gave its rulings, solely in Spanish, as is the case with the ECJ and French.
Wankers.
It really boils my piss how Brexit is reported overseas about being about xenophobia, and does us immense damage.
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
I agree. There's bound to be a little unease, as happens when a child takes the stabilisers off his bike. But we can cycle without them. (*)
However, success is not guaranteed either. It's why I've been a little disMAYed by our new PM's first few months. She's not being pushy (aggressive?) enough.
For those who want a bit of depressing reading from the NYRB: the decline in British industry since the 1950s, and how Brexit will make it worse.
Apparently we export only marginally more goods than BELGIUM.
I like the start of this article:
"It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the disaster the British people have inflicted upon themselves with their decision to leave the European Union, taken in the referendum last June."
I haven't read a single article in liberal New York media which attempts to explain to readers WHY Brexit happened, other than "xenophobia".
The sovereignty issue is simply ignored.
This could be briskly remedied by asking Americans how they would feel if the US Supreme Court sat in Mexico City, and conducted proceedings, and gave its rulings, solely in Spanish, as is the case with the ECJ and French.
Your last analogy is something of a stretch, to put it mildly, but I agree that there is an element of New York gloating about Brexit. London had completely eclipsed New York as THE world city. The feeling stateside is that Brexit will redress the balance. Maybe. It will be one of the saddest consequences of London's enforced departure from the Single Market.
Oh I'm sure they're gloating. And maybe London will topple, though I am not yet convinced, and I'm not sure New York is best placed to return. Power is moving east, America is in relative decline. Asia prefers London.
We shall see.
But my point is liberal Americans are simply misinformed, often by ageing, europhile Brit journalists who are as demented by Brexit as some of the Remainiacs on here. Henry Porter on Vanity Fair is a classic example. He describes a Brexit Britain patrolled by skinhead murderers.
It's nuts. Americans reading this bilge will be surprised if Britain emerges intact, prosperous and tolerant, after all.
The election is almost totally fought in Witney itself, if the unreliable measure of poster count is anything to go by. Witney has loads, in the the villages hardly a thing, except the Leffman stronghold of Charlbury ( I have been forced to drive round a lot of the constituency today)
Hardly any visible Tory activity. Such comments are usually a prelude to a safe Tory majority
One other factor, Witney used to run by a real old fashioned Tory machine politician, Barry Norton. He was very efficient and dedicated. A smart local politician. He was forced to stand down because of health issues. Cameron's replacement agent is relatively inexperienced and a failed candidate for the nomination, not a local person with knowledge of what needs doing in a close fight. Is the Tory bus being driven with energy or complacency?
There are some economists who are saying that Hillary would wish she had not been made President as the dollar is soon to be supplanted by other currencies which will be only one of the problems she will face.
By which other currency?
Think about it for a fraction of a second before you make a post. Some economists are full of s##t.
There are some economists who are saying that Hillary would wish she had not been made President as the dollar is soon to be supplanted by other currencies which will be only one of the problems she will face.
There are always some people who say, 'this will be a good election to lose', since the beginning of time.
Let's take food as anew example of the crossroads we stand at. We import far too much food, and the free market has allowed supermarkets to push an agenda where we import things like root vegetables to save literal pennies on the product. Not even a positive for the consumer as British options reduce choice gets cut and amazingly the stupidly cheap price for imports goes up.
The falling pound and possible hard Brexit is refocusing the industry on how we become more self sufficient that that has to be a positive - a 21st century Dig For Victory consumer campaign to get people eating a British grown diet has to help.
But then the big question - who will grow the food? The apparently hated eastern European migrants in Lincolnshire didn't force plucky British workers out of a job, they were welcomed in because 30 years of neo-Liberalism X Factor you are your iPhone societal "improvements" have turned people off working for a living. Remove the foreign workforce and despite unemployment being a big issue will the fieldsame once again be full of natives...?
For those who want a bit of depressing reading from the NYRB: the decline in British industry since the 1950s, and how Brexit will make it worse.
Apparently we export only marginally more goods than BELGIUM.
I like the start of this article:
"It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the disaster the British people have inflicted upon themselves with their decision to leave the European Union, taken in the referendum last June."
I haven't read a single article in liberal New York media which attempts to explain to readers WHY Brexit happened, other than "xenophobia".
The sovereignty issue is simply ignored.
This could be briskly remedied by asking Americans how they would feel if the US Supreme Court sat in Mexico City, and conducted proceedings, and gave its rulings, solely in Spanish, as is the case with the ECJ and French.
Wankers.
It really boils my piss how Brexit is reported overseas about being about xenophobia, and does us immense damage.
Erghhhh...... Brexit is actually causing us immense damage abroad. If you haven't picked that up by now you are as bonkers as Plato's obsessive ramping of Trump.
For those who want a bit of depressing reading from the NYRB: the decline in British industry since the 1950s, and how Brexit will make it worse.
Apparently we export only marginally more goods than BELGIUM.
I like the start of this article:
"It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the disaster the British people have inflicted upon themselves with their decision to leave the European Union, taken in the referendum last June."
I haven't read a single article in liberal New York media which attempts to explain to readers WHY Brexit happened, other than "xenophobia".
The sovereignty issue is simply ignored.
This could be briskly remedied by asking Americans how they would feel if the US Supreme Court sat in Mexico City, and conducted proceedings, and gave its rulings, solely in Spanish, as is the case with the ECJ and French.
Your last analogy is something of a stretch, to put it mildly, but I agree that there is an element of New York gloating about Brexit. London had completely eclipsed New York as THE world city. The feeling stateside is that Brexit will redress the balance. Maybe. It will be one of the saddest consequences of London's enforced departure from the Single Market.
Oh I'm sure they're gloating. And maybe London will topple, though I am not yet convinced, and I'm not sure New York is best placed to return. Power is moving east, America is in relative decline. Asia prefers London.
We shall see.
But my point is liberal Americans are simply misinformed, often by ageing, europhile Brit journalists who are as demented by Brexit as some of the Remainiacs on here. Henry Porter on Vanity Fair is a classic example. He describes a Brexit Britain patrolled by skinhead murderers.
It's nuts. Americans reading this bilge will be surprised if Britain emerges intact, prosperous and tolerant, after all.
I agree that Asians' general anglophilia might help us through it.
For those who want a bit of depressing reading from the NYRB: the decline in British industry since the 1950s, and how Brexit will make it worse.
Apparently we export only marginally more goods than BELGIUM.
I like the start of this article:
"It is hard to exaggerate the scale of the disaster the British people have inflicted upon themselves with their decision to leave the European Union, taken in the referendum last June."
It's a great and sobering article. No doubt all the usual ostriches will remain firmly head in the sand clucking about their special britishness...
Considering we joined the EU with our tail between our legs as the sick man of Europe, I struggle to imagine how we'll thrive this time after Brexit.
Oh we can thrive after Brexit. Our growth and success after the seventies are tangential to the EU; it was mainly the pain of moving from old industries to new. We don't have the same problem now.
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Trouble is a lot of people here are already thinking we will be a failure.
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
Never mind confidence, it's more that our captains of industry have spent the last thirty years perfecting the art of asset stripping. A whole change in culture is required.
Let's take food as anew example of the crossroads we stand at. We import far too much food, and the free market has allowed supermarkets to push an agenda where we import things like root vegetables to save literal pennies on the product. Not even a positive for the consumer as British options reduce choice gets cut and amazingly the stupidly cheap price for imports goes up.
The falling pound and possible hard Brexit is refocusing the industry on how we become more self sufficient that that has to be a positive - a 21st century Dig For Victory consumer campaign to get people eating a British grown diet has to help.
But then the big question - who will grow the food? The apparently hated eastern European migrants in Lincolnshire didn't force plucky British workers out of a job, they were welcomed in because 30 years of neo-Liberalism X Factor you are your iPhone societal "improvements" have turned people off working for a living. Remove the foreign workforce and despite unemployment being a big issue will the fieldsame once again be full of natives...?
Well we could issue work permits to E Europeans ( or whomever ) to pick the veg, or pay the Brits more to make it more attractive. There's a balance to be struck and the market has to find its level depending on the value of Sterling, the amount of work permits we wish to issue ( which will affect any market of course), and the price of veg sold to the retailers.
Whatever, it's different to having carte blanche to 60 odd million working age adults in E Europe prepared to work for less than the locals with the consequences of large scale immigration which clearly has not done down well in large parts of E England ( heart of agriculture country).
Comments
"Bear in mind that these results apply only to England, Wales, and selected Scottish seats."
Before the referendum I said we could succeed or fail as either part of the EU or an independent state. We have IMO chosen a slightly harder route, but success is still perfectly possible. But the moment we start thinking we will be a failure, we will be.
Although we need to keep an eye out for the new new industries ...
Now we have Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn, so any comparison with that period is unwarranted.
Absolutely if Labour get back in power then we will be straight back to the sick man of Europe but that has nothing to do with Europe.
People should do whatever works best for them and their families.
Mean spirited, small-minded busy-bodies should mind their own business.
Anyway, just because growth is less does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that there is no need for a new runway. The need remains immediate, and is acute. I conclude that Faisal is a moron.
* Used to be by far, but now being chased by Mumbai, which although it technically has two runways, can only use one at a time as they cross each other. Also, Mumbai Airport still uses BOM as its code, which is marvellous.
Genuine question I've only ever dabbled with Twitter.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/18/two-thirds-of-child-refugees-entering-uk-found-to-be-adults-figu/
By biggest worry about Brexit is that we no longer have the confidence or national self-belief we need in ourselves to make a full success of it, and grasp its opportunities.
Wonder how many petabytes of data there are at Google towers these days...
Well, there is f all on the telly tonight, so why not.
It's more than naivety. Leaving aside the general sh*tness of what she said, it's also illegal for employers to do as she suggests.
Why do you like her?
However, success is not guaranteed either. It's why I've been a little disMAYed by our new PM's first few months. She's not being pushy (aggressive?) enough.
(*) Worst. Analogy. Ever.
Now, we have no excuses, we are fully in control and the world is our oyster.
When civil engineering goes bad:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-37694399
If Britain lacked self-confidence we'd still be in Europe as we'd cling to nurse.
Theresa Maybe is like the weak willed father who never pushes his child on the bike without stabilisers, for fear his child might fall and be hurt.
Thus, his child never learns to ride a bike.
Clinton 40 .. Trump 35
http://magellanstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Magellan-Strategies-Colorado-Presidential-and-US-Senate-Survey-Summary-101816.pdf
It was the one interview. I would look for a pattern of behaviour. I think she does have a passion for child development, feels it personally, and not always logically, was under a lot of stress at that time and not thinking clearly. Also, clearly, the Times were looking to help skewer her leadership bid. As were many other Tories.
I like her natural, warm, personable style. I liked her performance on the Treasury select committees, when she grilled Bob Diamond, her standing up to George Osborne, her performance in the ITV debate, her leadership of the Fresh Start group and she put in a good performance on the Open Europe wargames on the EU renegotiation.
I certainly don't think she deserves the opprobrium heaped on her since, which I think is as much about her social conservatism as anything else.
My biggest fear is that we lack the confidence to stare down our own issues and address them.
The constituency for a delusional Daily Mail view of the world seems too large.
If we and our political class were honest about our educational, productivity, regional imbalances and industrial issues, I'd have confidence in our ability to fix them.
But we prefer to grizzle about asylum seekers, "Europe", and immigrants on one side, (and the privatisation of the NHS, Black Lives Matter, and Palestine on the other").
Not sure what it would take for "Tory Britain", by which I mean a complacent and outdated view of Britain's role in the world, to be shaken.
Politically, our EU reform efforts (assuming they were ever sincere, despite the spin back home) to decentralise and prevent further integration were all failures.
It really boils my piss how Brexit is reported overseas about being about xenophobia, and does us immense damage.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/30/matt-cartoons-october-2016/
NEW THREAD
The election is almost totally fought in Witney itself, if the unreliable measure of poster count is anything to go by. Witney has loads, in the the villages hardly a thing, except the Leffman stronghold of Charlbury ( I have been forced to drive round a lot of the constituency today)
Hardly any visible Tory activity. Such comments are usually a prelude to a safe Tory majority
One other factor, Witney used to run by a real old fashioned Tory machine politician, Barry Norton. He was very efficient and dedicated. A smart local politician. He was forced to stand down because of health issues. Cameron's replacement agent is relatively inexperienced and a failed candidate for the nomination, not a local person with knowledge of what needs doing in a close fight. Is the Tory bus being driven with energy or complacency?
Think about it for a fraction of a second before you make a post. Some economists are full of s##t.
The falling pound and possible hard Brexit is refocusing the industry on how we become more self sufficient that that has to be a positive - a 21st century Dig For Victory consumer campaign to get people eating a British grown diet has to help.
But then the big question - who will grow the food? The apparently hated eastern European migrants in Lincolnshire didn't force plucky British workers out of a job, they were welcomed in because 30 years of neo-Liberalism X Factor you are your iPhone societal "improvements" have turned people off working for a living. Remove the foreign workforce and despite unemployment being a big issue will the fieldsame once again be full of natives...?
Whatever, it's different to having carte blanche to 60 odd million working age adults in E Europe prepared to work for less than the locals with the consequences of large scale immigration which clearly has not done down well in large parts of E England ( heart of agriculture country).