From that poll: "Eighty-eight percent (88%) of voters say they are now certain how they will vote. Among these voters, Trump has a 10-point lead over Clinton – 53% to 43%. Johnson gets two percent (2%) and Stein one percent (1%). This is the first time any candidate has crossed the 50% mark. Among those who still could change their minds, it’s Clinton 36%, Trump 36%, Johnson 22% and Stein six percent (6%)."
But it's Ras, so safe to ignore....
Unwise to ignore it IMO. Bad poll for Hillary. See where it goes tomorrow.
Yes. I don't think for a minute that Parliament is going to pass this.
Richard, I have a massive amount of respect for you, but in this case I think you're insane. Politicians love winning elections and gaining power. There may be a few crazies (Nick Clegg, Kenneth Clarke) who genuinely love the EU, but for most it was just a part of the post War consensus.
There are no votes to be won in Sunderland or Stoke-on-Trent or a hundred other Labour seats for opposing this. On the contrary, MPs who opposed the overwhelming will of their constituents would find themselves without a job come the next election. Even inside the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable and Paddy Ashdown have said the will of the people must be respected.
Hmm. I CAN now see a process where Brexit is stopped. Let's say A50 is delayed, probably in the Lords (highly likely). So we won't have triggered it by the French and German elections. The new German and French governments offer us a new deal. Sarko wants this.
And see here: the Germans are really keen for us to stay, as they now see the damage Brexit does to the EU
and what the hell has any of that got to do with their fitness to decide on the law? Perhaps Mr Robbins only wants judges who make rulings based on his own political views rather than judges who make decisions based on interpreting the law?
The text of the referendum bill made it clear that the referendum was advisory. It is quite possible, and it has been done in the past, to make a referendum binding.
Whatever the merits of the case, this was NOT was remainers told us. We were told that out meant out. NO going back. No second thoughts. Be careful what you wish for.
So the £350 million a week for the NHS still stands, given it was emblazoned on Leave's campaign bus and leaflets?
From that poll: "Eighty-eight percent (88%) of voters say they are now certain how they will vote. Among these voters, Trump has a 10-point lead over Clinton – 53% to 43%. Johnson gets two percent (2%) and Stein one percent (1%). This is the first time any candidate has crossed the 50% mark. Among those who still could change their minds, it’s Clinton 36%, Trump 36%, Johnson 22% and Stein six percent (6%)."
But it's Ras, so safe to ignore....
I don't ignore Rasmussen .... I post their results as a minor lunchtime chuckle fest ....
You might well be right, but the report's author made clear he felt his data did not necessarily support 'white flight':
“White people are leaving urban areas in a disproportionate number – and they avoid moving to diverse areas when they do move. But we can’t say that is white flight because the motivations are many and various,” he said, arguing it could be to do with the dream of a place in the country or an older cohort retiring to rural communities.
[Guardian]
If it continues where I live then me and my family are serious considering moving,for me it's more for the safety in numbers after your family have being subjected to racialist abuse and attacks.
Yes. I don't think for a minute that Parliament is going to pass this.
Richard, I have a massive amount of respect for you, but in this case I think you're insane. Politicians love winning elections and gaining power. There may be a few crazies (Nick Clegg, Kenneth Clarke) who genuinely love the EU, but for most it was just a part of the post War consensus.
There are no votes to be won in Sunderland or Stoke-on-Trent or a hundred other Labour seats for opposing this. On the contrary, MPs who opposed the overwhelming will of their constituents would find themselves without a job come the next election. Even inside the Liberal Democrats, Vince Cable and Paddy Ashdown have said the will of the people must be respected.
Hmm. I CAN now see a process where Brexit is stopped. Let's say A50 is delayed, probably in the Lords (highly likely). So we won't have triggered it by the French and German elections. The new German and French governments offer us a new deal. Sarko wants this.
And see here: the Germans are really keen for us to stay, as they now see the damage Brexit does to the EU
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
From that poll: "Eighty-eight percent (88%) of voters say they are now certain how they will vote. Among these voters, Trump has a 10-point lead over Clinton – 53% to 43%. Johnson gets two percent (2%) and Stein one percent (1%). This is the first time any candidate has crossed the 50% mark. Among those who still could change their minds, it’s Clinton 36%, Trump 36%, Johnson 22% and Stein six percent (6%)."
But it's Ras, so safe to ignore....
Unwise to ignore it IMO. Bad poll for Hillary. See where it goes tomorrow.
88% certain to vote ? We are talking about the USA, right ?
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
Indeed. Why would any PM trigger it when public opinion has shifted?
If you trust the polls. That is a big IF after they have been wrong so much. You can only really trust it where there are overwhelming majorities, like the number of people that want to control freedom of movement.
You might well be right, but the report's author made clear he felt his data did not necessarily support 'white flight':
“White people are leaving urban areas in a disproportionate number – and they avoid moving to diverse areas when they do move. But we can’t say that is white flight because the motivations are many and various,” he said, arguing it could be to do with the dream of a place in the country or an older cohort retiring to rural communities.
[Guardian]
If it continues where I live then me and my family are serious considering moving,for me it's more for the safety in numbers after your family have being subjected to racialist abuse and attacks.
From that poll: "Eighty-eight percent (88%) of voters say they are now certain how they will vote. Among these voters, Trump has a 10-point lead over Clinton – 53% to 43%. Johnson gets two percent (2%) and Stein one percent (1%). This is the first time any candidate has crossed the 50% mark. Among those who still could change their minds, it’s Clinton 36%, Trump 36%, Johnson 22% and Stein six percent (6%)."
But it's Ras, so safe to ignore....
Unwise to ignore it IMO. Bad poll for Hillary. See where it goes tomorrow.
88% certain to vote ? We are talking about the USA, right ?
The lower the traditional turn out, the fewer new voters you need to break all the regular models.
Overall turnout in Wisconsin is outpacing 2012, with bigger shares coming from major Democratic counties such as Dane and Milwaukee.
Does it follow that bigger turnout favours the Democrats? Maybe the new voters support the other side but previously didn't bother.
Yes it does. US voters are broadly as tribal as they come. Banking votes is a key aspect of the campaign. It's why the GOP try to restrict early voting in many states - It normally favours the Democrats.
Would they have made this much fuss if said Judge was heterosexual ?
twitter.com/mjrobbins/status/794151054363529220
and what the hell has any of that got to do with their fitness to decide on the law? Perhaps Mr Robbins only wants judges who make rulings based on his own political views rather than judges who make decisions based on interpreting the law?
I'm not sure that Mr Robbins is the correct recipient of your annoyance. He appears to be tweeting a headline in a disapproving way.
He seems a little bit obsessed by the gay thing though as it's obviously being used as journalistic padding to describe the third and least interesting character. If Robbins was seriously critiquing the panel he'd have referenced the substantive points about the first two.
Partisan tweeting against poor headline subbing. Yawn.
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
American political polling: testing the Margin of Error to destruction!
and what the hell has any of that got to do with their fitness to decide on the law? Perhaps Mr Robbins only wants judges who make rulings based on his own political views rather than judges who make decisions based on interpreting the law?
The problem is that judges tend to always be from one subset of society, which is the same subset that Cameron and Osborne and Blair come from. The political views of that subset are completely over represented in legal decisions. We see it when criminals are let off easy and we see it today in the pro-EU ruling.
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
...and the leavers would still lynch them for SOFT Brexit, so...
I think the premise is unlikely, though. They might turn against it once they find out what they're actually going to end up getting, but they won't know that until right before it happens.
You might well be right, but the report's author made clear he felt his data did not necessarily support 'white flight':
“White people are leaving urban areas in a disproportionate number – and they avoid moving to diverse areas when they do move. But we can’t say that is white flight because the motivations are many and various,” he said, arguing it could be to do with the dream of a place in the country or an older cohort retiring to rural communities.
[Guardian]
If it continues where I live then me and my family are serious considering moving,for me it's more for the safety in numbers after your family have being subjected to racialist abuse and attacks.
Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words.
And not going to be helped ny the May policy on religious schools. One of the problems of (for instance) Bradford, is the notably large number of secondary schools which select by religion (either Catholic or Muslim).
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
American political polling: testing the Margin of Error to destruction!
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
Indeed. Why would any PM trigger it when public opinion has shifted?
If you trust the polls. That is a big IF after they have been wrong so much. You can only really trust it where there are overwhelming majorities, like the number of people that want to control freedom of movement.
But polls do change politics. Remember when Gordon Brown abandoned a planned election, after a few bad polls.
If polling shows Remain leading 60/40 next March, it will have consequences.
That was before polling was shown to be less and less accurate. Realistically, May can't get away with anything that doesn't restrict free movement, at least a bit.
Staying under EU law will also be messy. Personally, I think Brexit-lite is going to disappoint both sides. Better to pick a horse and go for Clean Brexit.
You might well be right, but the report's author made clear he felt his data did not necessarily support 'white flight':
“White people are leaving urban areas in a disproportionate number – and they avoid moving to diverse areas when they do move. But we can’t say that is white flight because the motivations are many and various,” he said, arguing it could be to do with the dream of a place in the country or an older cohort retiring to rural communities.
[Guardian]
If it continues where I live then me and my family are serious considering moving,for me it's more for the safety in numbers after your family have being subjected to racialist abuse and attacks.
What sort of things are we talking about?
House windows smashed with red house bricks,me chased by asian gang with baseball bats/pick axe handles shouting kill the white bastard (many in that street egging them on),brother who had knife held to throat and racial abuse on occasions(even by children of 5 or 6 years of age).
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
Polling had Remain ahead before the ACTUAL referendum too and 2% is nothing. However it does suggest May will attempt softish Brexit and combined with the Court judgement and Corbyn's leadership of Labour Paul Nuttall may find he could not have become UKIP leader at a better time
Certainly explains why Clinton has been focusing on it, even when more usual suspects like NC/OH/etc are in a lot of trouble.
Causality may be working in both directions there. Recently somebody posted TV spending numbers, showing Hillary going quite big in Arizona, while Trump was spending zero. Presumably all that advertising does actually swing some votes...
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
...and the leavers would still lynch them for SOFT Brexit, so...
I think the premise is unlikely, though. They might turn against it once they find out what they're actually going to end up getting, but they won't know that until right before it happens.
The the European Communities Act would still need to be repealed one way or another even if we do invoke Article 50. Parliament's rightful role is to debate that when it happens, not with Article 50.
I still think this is pro-Remain judges pulling something out of the air for political reasons.
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
American political polling: testing the Margin of Error to destruction!
Some of the national polls coming out has Clinton coming up a bit. I would also counter that the FBI stuff isn't really hurting her with her demo because they hate Racist Trump so much, and early voting is up overall ( and seems to favour her)
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
On Hard Brexit versus Soft Brexit versus Minimal Brexit. I am picking up three things:
1. Germany is hard line on no access to the Single Market without complete FoM. I have heard many German players pitching in on Brexit, from Merkel to her government colleagues, business leaders, academics, trade unionists. What they have said without a single exception is no cherry-picking. No access to the SM without freedom of movement.
2. The UK Government threw away their leverage with the Nissan deal. They gave guarantees to Nissan that aren't in their gift and which have not been negotiated with those that can provide those guarantees. Technically the Government can renege on their commitments to Nissan but the cost to them of doing so will be very high. They will be under great pressure to agree any quid pro quo demanded of them.
3. Brexit generally is heading into a "too difficult" basket.
The vote has to be respected. There will be a formal Brexit. The tension between supporting business (with Nissan being a primary consideration) and the core policy of controlling borders will come to a head. Although they are not in the mindspace yet I am becoming more confident that Government will sacrifice border controls for continuity with the EU. In that case we end up with pretty much what we have at present but with no input into decision making to protect our interests and no ECJ to ensure a level playing field.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
So if May is smart we'll get a soft brexit and a harder immigration policy elsewhere. Free trade but fewer imams would surely seem like a good result to the vast majority.
''I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh. ''
True but the Syrians coming in are from France, not Syria. That was the final straw, I think. And for some voters, in order to put pressure on the more militant muslim communities, the whole apparatus of government that we now see spiking the referendum decision needs to be removed.
Its ugly and unfortunate to say this, but that is where we are headed.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
The worry I have is that Parliament tries to water down the result and the left behind don't immediately react to it. They just fume silently. The resentment festers. It comes bursting out a decade later with British Trump-style demagogue.
Brexit could be the UK's equivalent of amnesty in the US. The lawyers and the politicians think they know better than the people so they continuously try to get round the will of the people. At a certain point, the people lose complete faith and trust in all of them. They then won't listen to rhyme or reason.
This referendum energized people to vote more than any in a generation. Politicians are playing a dangerous game.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
I thought all of the dodgy imams came from Belgium these days anyway?
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
American political polling: testing the Margin of Error to destruction!
Some of the national polls coming out has Clinton coming up a bit. I would also counter that the FBI stuff isn't really hurting her with her demo because they hate Racist Trump so much, and early voting is up overall ( and seems to favour her)
Also if you look at the timing, the weekend headlines were quite brutal and it was only Monday/Tuesday that the Dems managed to communicate that there was nothing there.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
I thought all of the dodgy imams came from Belgium these days anyway?
Give it a few years. They'll all be coming from Sweden and Germany.
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
I think most Brexiters know in their heart-of-hearts that the longer it goes on the more likely their initial 3.8% lead will fade away. June 23rd was the high-water mark. I suspect. Hence the hysteria from certain quarters when anything that looks like a delay occurs. Like many Remainers I am reconciled to the fact we will Leave but hell will freeze over before I accept a hard-Brexit without a fight.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
Having read this paragraph 94 there is little doubt on the judgement. It does raise serious questions about the quality of legal and political strategic advice that Mrs May is getting. The Govt lawyers let her down very badly.
It's worth reading the blurb about their Shy Trumper control. Trump DOES gain once that control test is applied (they phone as well as internet poll etc etc). but not enough to change the result.
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
Or, there isn't universal swing in operation.
It is hard to judge all of the information, but I'm now as follows:
Clinton
319+ EVs +613 270-318 +697 250-269 +760 0-250 760 less £15 per ECV below 249.
That leaves me in profit for anything over 200 ECVs for Clinton, which requires Trump to win Virginia.
Quentin Letts Labour MP Paul Flynn just suggested MPs were more mature than Brexit voters. For the record, his Newport seat voted 56 per cent to Leave.
This is the 2nd big threat to Brexit, certainly Hard Brexit.
If public opinion shifts emphatically, let's say to 60/40 Remain by next Spring, would any PM trigger A50?
It would certainly take a very brave politician to go for HARD Brexit with polling like that.
Indeed. Why would any PM trigger it when public opinion has shifted?
If you trust the polls. That is a big IF after they have been wrong so much. You can only really trust it where there are overwhelming majorities, like the number of people that want to control freedom of movement.
But polls do change politics. Remember when Gordon Brown abandoned a planned election, after a few bad polls.
If polling shows Remain leading 60/40 next March, it will have consequences.
If we stayed in the EU now it would be a far greater national humiliation than Suez and effectively the end of the UK as a sovereign nation state after we come groveling back to the EU for protection. At least before we were after Germany the second strongest power in the EU, staying in now France and Gernany would treat us like a doormat. I reluctantly voted Remain but I have little time for Leave voters who put us in this situation and now have cold feet before Article 50 has even been triggered. Softish Brexit maybe but remaining in the EU is a non starter
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
Banning halal food consumption would be the easiest way to get practising Muslims to emigrate.
And I do mean all practising Muslims not just "devout".
From that poll: "Eighty-eight percent (88%) of voters say they are now certain how they will vote. Among these voters, Trump has a 10-point lead over Clinton – 53% to 43%. Johnson gets two percent (2%) and Stein one percent (1%). This is the first time any candidate has crossed the 50% mark. Among those who still could change their minds, it’s Clinton 36%, Trump 36%, Johnson 22% and Stein six percent (6%)."
But it's Ras, so safe to ignore....
Unwise to ignore it IMO. Bad poll for Hillary. See where it goes tomorrow.
88% certain to vote ? We are talking about the USA, right ?
Sure. I'm not saying the poll is right (it most probably isn't and has very little support) merely that it is unwise to ignore polls.
''I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh. ''
True but the Syrians coming in are from France, not Syria. That was the final straw, I think. And for some voters, in order to put pressure on the more militant muslim communities, the whole apparatus of government that we now see spiking the referendum decision needs to be removed.
Its ugly and unfortunate to say this, but that is where we are headed.
We should get orthodox off-spinners from Bangladesh instead. No "mystery" rubbish. Just bowl on length.
On Hard Brexit versus Soft Brexit versus Minimal Brexit. I am picking up three things:
1. Germany is hard line on no access to the Single Market without complete FoM. I have heard many German players pitching in on Brexit, from Merkel to her government colleagues, business leaders, academics, trade unionists. What they have said without a single exception is no cherry-picking. No access to the SM without freedom of movement.
2. The UK Government threw away their leverage with the Nissan deal. They gave guarantees to Nissan that aren't in their gift and which have not been negotiated with those that can provide those guarantees. Technically the Government can renege on their commitments to Nissan but the cost to them of doing so will be very high. They will be under great pressure to agree any quid pro quo demanded of them.
3. Brexit generally is heading into a "too difficult" basket.
The vote has to be respected. There will be a formal Brexit. The tension between supporting business (with Nissan being a primary consideration) and the core policy of controlling borders will come to a head. Although they are not in the mindspace yet I am becoming more confident that Government will sacrifice border controls for continuity with the EU. In that case we end up with pretty much what we have at present but with no input into decision making to protect our interests and no ECJ to ensure a level playing field.
Yes, probably.
We will be in something like EFTA or the EEA, where there a modicum of control over Free Movement, but not much. Our contributions will go down, but not much.
However we will get back all the stuff that is not Single Market related, the rest of the acquis, fisheries, agriculture, justice, the rest.
The EU will be able to point and laugh at the terrible deal we've got. Soft Brexiteers will be content with a return of some sovereignty and look forward, perhaps forlornly, to regaining more.
Hardcore Remainers like you and hardcore Brexiteers will be dismayed or outraged, but Max's 60% of voters will shrug. And life will go on.
What happens if there is a fresh EU immigration wave after the deal is struck? What if it hits record numbers again? What if this time it is a lot of Muslim young men from Germany and Sweden?
Go to a lot of places at night in Sweden right now and you will see groups of Syrian youths hanging out on street corners, wolf whistling and making comments to women passing by. It has a lot of female liberal friends of mine questioning their beliefs. I shudder to think what it would do to the British mood, given we turned against mass immigration a long time ago.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
So Halal meat should be banned ? We can still eat kosher meat, I presume.
Really I think this is an overreaction. All the court has said is that it is the law that the Sec State can't use Crown prerogative to issue Article 50. Parliament will have to be involved.
Yes. And that is a good thing. Parliamentary government is what we have - or ought to have - in this country. Not government by Royal Prerogative.
This point is key, regardless of whether one is pro or against Brexit.
If Parliament chooses to defy the will of the people as expressed in the referendum, well then, they will pay a heavy political price, rightly so. And this point too applies, regardless of which side one is on.
May should have involved Parliament from the start.
Having read this paragraph 94 there is little doubt on the judgement. It does raise serious questions about the quality of legal and political strategic advice that Mrs May is getting. The Govt lawyers let her down very badly.
It also suggests that any appeal in the Supreme Court is just for show, and is surely doomed to fail.
''The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK.''
The UK's affiliations to the ECJ and the ECHR are seen as big barriers to that, and Brexit was about that too.
Its ugly and difficult to admit, but for some voters the referendum was about clearing the decks for a potential government in the future to do what it likes in regard to certain communities in this country.
odysseanproject @odysseanproject 19m ago 4/ Why? Because Parliamentary sovereignty means Govt cannot (& shd not try to) change domestic law by use of the prerogative
''I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh. ''
True but the Syrians coming in are from France, not Syria. That was the final straw, I think. And for some voters, in order to put pressure on the more militant muslim communities, the whole apparatus of government that we now see spiking the referendum decision needs to be removed.
Its ugly and unfortunate to say this, but that is where we are headed.
This is also sadly an area where the people have been ill-served by the media. Even EU obsessives like Richard Tyndall had misconceptions about the scope and operation of free movement within the EU.
A non-EU citizen in the Schengen zone, even with indefinite leave to remain there, does NOT have any automatic right even to enter the UK for a short visit.
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
Or, there isn't universal swing in operation.
It is hard to judge all of the information, but I'm now as follows:
Clinton
319+ EVs +613 270-318 +697 250-269 +760 0-250 760 less £15 per ECV below 249.
That leaves me in profit for anything over 200 ECVs for Clinton, which requires Trump to win Virginia.
That's a great looking book, I wish it were mine! AAMOI, how do you expect the POTUS election to finish?
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
So Halal meat should be banned ? We can still eat kosher meat, I presume.
When Jewish people start committing acts of terrorism we'll have a look at it I guess.
Quentin Letts Labour MP Paul Flynn just suggested MPs were more mature than Brexit voters. For the record, his Newport seat voted 56 per cent to Leave.
''The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK.''
The UK's affiliations to the ECJ and the ECHR are seen as big barriers to that, and Brexit was about that too.
Its ugly and difficult to admit, but for some voters the referendum was about clearing the decks for a potential government in the future to do what it likes in regard to certain communities in this country.
May has already said we are staying in the ECHR. A soft Brexit would probably guarantee it.
People expecting this harsh clamp down on Muslim cultural practices are day dreaming. I doubt you would get a majority in the Conservative party, let alone in parliament overall. Especially when Muslims are becoming a more political important voting group. It would need a UKIP government to happen.
The only way you get more Muslim integration is by restricting immigration and hope those that are here become moderate over time.
Damn. Been out all morning and missed nearly 4 hours of gloating!
Anyway, the interesting result of a judgement to uphold the rule of Law in the UK, with the UK Parliament being Sovereign, has been the Kippers calling for civil unrest...
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
Banning halal food consumption would be the easiest way to get practising Muslims to emigrate.
And I do mean all practising Muslims not just "devout".
I doubt it, most would just adjust to the new reality and those who don't want to will leave for another country which doesn't have any restrictions.
''The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK.''
The UK's affiliations to the ECJ and the ECHR are seen as big barriers to that, and Brexit was about that too.
Its ugly and difficult to admit, but for some voters the referendum was about clearing the decks for a potential government in the future to do what it likes in regard to certain communities in this country.
Maybe we could start by getting the police to investigate and the CPS to prosecute ALL Rotherham type grooming/abuse/rape cases across the country (of which I suspect there are tens of thousands), ALL the female genital mutilation cases, ALL the honour killings, ALL the animal abuse Halal butchery cases etc. All we'd really need to do is expect and demand that the Muslim community be made to live within our existing laws. It is the abject failure to do so for politically correct reasons that also feeds the anti-immigrant feeling.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
So Halal meat should be banned ? We can still eat kosher meat, I presume.
When Jewish people start committing acts of terrorism we'll have a look at it I guess.
You know Muslims are allowed to eat kosher food if theres no halal food right?
Having read this paragraph 94 there is little doubt on the judgement. It does raise serious questions about the quality of legal and political strategic advice that Mrs May is getting. The Govt lawyers let her down very badly.
Once the legal challenge took place, the government lawyers had to put their case, however weak. May may have gone for triggering Art.50 herself because it was politically convenient.
The more time goes, she appears to quite incompetent. Cameron may not have done detail but, at least, took advice.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
So Halal meat should be banned ? We can still eat kosher meat, I presume.
When Jewish people start committing acts of terrorism we'll have a look at it I guess.
You know Muslims are allowed to eat kosher food if theres no halal food right?
The new voters tend to be younger and they are less enthusiastic about Hillary than Obama, it is not new voters but probablyalready registered voters in 2012 who simply stayed at home then who Trump needs to target
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
I agree that the most troubling immigration, for most voters concerned on this issue, is Muslim immigration. But, ironically, Brexit does little to alter that, it will stop waiters from Belgium not imams from Bangladesh.
These voters only went for Brexit as it was the only anti-immigration lever they were allowed to pull.
The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK. Ban Halal slaughter and importation of Halal produce, ban the burka, get rid of religious equality (since religion is a choice) etc... a lot of smaller measures will add up to net emigration of Muslim people who wish to live by devout doctrine as those who are here leave for nations where it is easier and those who want to do that don't bother coming here in the first place. Simple in theory, but plagued with the possibility of serious problems in reality.
So Halal meat should be banned ? We can still eat kosher meat, I presume.
When Jewish people start committing acts of terrorism we'll have a look at it I guess.
You know Muslims are allowed to eat kosher food if theres no halal food right?
I know, again which is why the more devout types will leave and the less devout ones will make do and secular ones won't care.
''Of course it's White Flight. Everyone knows it, everyone sees it, he admits the data reveals it, he just can't bring himself to use the words. ''
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
The worry I have is that Parliament tries to water down the result and the left behind don't immediately react to it. They just fume silently. The resentment festers. It comes bursting out a decade later with British Trump-style demagogue.
Brexit could be the UK's equivalent of amnesty in the US. The lawyers and the politicians think they know better than the people so they continuously try to get round the will of the people. At a certain point, the people lose complete faith and trust in all of them. They then won't listen to rhyme or reason.
This referendum energized people to vote more than any in a generation. Politicians are playing a dangerous game.
I'm rather inclined to agree. The referendum result has given us a short breathing space to deal with a little local outbreak of fire. Avoid the issues and whoomph - the whole building will go up.
Certainly explains why Clinton has been focusing on it, even when more usual suspects like NC/OH/etc are in a lot of trouble.
Causality may be working in both directions there. Recently somebody posted TV spending numbers, showing Hillary going quite big in Arizona, while Trump was spending zero. Presumably all that advertising does actually swing some votes...
''The simplest, but difficult in reality, way to do this would be to make it very difficult to be a devout Muslim in the UK.''
The UK's affiliations to the ECJ and the ECHR are seen as big barriers to that, and Brexit was about that too.
Its ugly and difficult to admit, but for some voters the referendum was about clearing the decks for a potential government in the future to do what it likes in regard to certain communities in this country.
May has already said we are staying in the ECHR. A soft Brexit would probably guarantee it.
People expecting this harsh clamp down on Muslim cultural practices are day dreaming. I doubt you would get a majority in the Conservative party, let alone in parliament overall. Especially when Muslims are becoming a more political important voting group. It would need a UKIP government to happen.
The only way you get more Muslim integration is by restricting immigration and hope those that are here become moderate over time.
That's what should have happened after Bradford riots ,how can you do this with poor unskilled mass immigration that followed the riots.
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
There's a lot of contradictory data out there. It can't all be accurate. Either Trump's national share is strengthening and he will knock off a swathe of swing states, or it isn't and he won't.
Or, there isn't universal swing in operation.
It is hard to judge all of the information, but I'm now as follows:
Clinton
319+ EVs +613 270-318 +697 250-269 +760 0-250 760 less £15 per ECV below 249.
That leaves me in profit for anything over 200 ECVs for Clinton, which requires Trump to win Virginia.
That's a great looking book, I wish it were mine! AAMOI, how do you expect the POTUS election to finish?
Clinton 213 - 323 ECVs upper, lower range.
Trump faces significant difficulties getting over 266, if he does however then he could easily push Hillary down to 217 (Since I expect Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania all to be reasonably correlated)
Comments
That's why she is visiting Arizona.
I've always thought we'll have a soft Brexit, the current hooha is just pre negotiation manouevring.
I'm happy enough with associate status as long as we draw the line on further integration.
Latino effect presumably there?
I think it's just about possible that Trump loses some or all of AZ, CO, NV, FL and carries WI.
Demographics.
So the £350 million a week for the NHS still stands, given it was emblazoned on Leave's campaign bus and leaflets?
IF the EU were to come up with a decent offer for us to stay, now would be the time.
PA+VA+NV+AZ = 276. She can lose Florida, North Carolina, Colorado and NH, and still win.
http://tinyurl.com/zumlzom (rcp map)
that poll just says we're where we were
Trump a point down there in a massive sample.
All eyes on the Western Front.
He seems a little bit obsessed by the gay thing though as it's obviously being used as journalistic padding to describe the third and least interesting character. If Robbins was seriously critiquing the panel he'd have referenced the substantive points about the first two.
Partisan tweeting against poor headline subbing. Yawn.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/barack-obama-hillary-clinton-chapel-hill/506351/
(Which is probably more effective anyway.)
Clinton 52 .. Trump 47
https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/MCModeStudyFinalToplines.pdf
I think the premise is unlikely, though. They might turn against it once they find out what they're actually going to end up getting, but they won't know that until right before it happens.
One of the problems of (for instance) Bradford, is the notably large number of secondary schools which select by religion (either Catholic or Muslim).
Spooky ....
Staying under EU law will also be messy. Personally, I think Brexit-lite is going to disappoint both sides. Better to pick a horse and go for Clean Brexit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACDqFL8mW3s
I was vaguely sniffy about the prospect of a Trump presidency before listening; now I'm absolutely terrified.
This is why voters want full control of immigration and why they will not be satisfied by any brexit lite.
Rightly or wrongly, they want to have the choice of being able to vote for parties that will target zero immigration from muslim countries.
Whisper it, they may even want to be able to vote for parties that will target muslim emigration. Ugly, but true, I have a feeling.
Death knell for final salary pension schemes (Except in the public sector) ?
Best you get on the blower to your contacts Sean.
Crucial paragraph.
I still think this is pro-Remain judges pulling something out of the air for political reasons.
1. Germany is hard line on no access to the Single Market without complete FoM. I have heard many German players pitching in on Brexit, from Merkel to her government colleagues, business leaders, academics, trade unionists. What they have said without a single exception is no cherry-picking. No access to the SM without freedom of movement.
2. The UK Government threw away their leverage with the Nissan deal. They gave guarantees to Nissan that aren't in their gift and which have not been negotiated with those that can provide those guarantees. Technically the Government can renege on their commitments to Nissan but the cost to them of doing so will be very high. They will be under great pressure to agree any quid pro quo demanded of them.
3. Brexit generally is heading into a "too difficult" basket.
The vote has to be respected. There will be a formal Brexit. The tension between supporting business (with Nissan being a primary consideration) and the core policy of controlling borders will come to a head. Although they are not in the mindspace yet I am becoming more confident that Government will sacrifice border controls for continuity with the EU. In that case we end up with pretty much what we have at present but with no input into decision making to protect our interests and no ECJ to ensure a level playing field.
True but the Syrians coming in are from France, not Syria. That was the final straw, I think. And for some voters, in order to put pressure on the more militant muslim communities, the whole apparatus of government that we now see spiking the referendum decision needs to be removed.
Its ugly and unfortunate to say this, but that is where we are headed.
Brexit could be the UK's equivalent of amnesty in the US. The lawyers and the politicians think they know better than the people so they continuously try to get round the will of the people. At a certain point, the people lose complete faith and trust in all of them. They then won't listen to rhyme or reason.
This referendum energized people to vote more than any in a generation. Politicians are playing a dangerous game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=texjUk599Ac
Clinton
319+ EVs +613
270-318 +697
250-269 +760
0-250 760 less £15 per ECV below 249.
That leaves me in profit for anything over 200 ECVs for Clinton, which requires Trump to win Virginia.
Labour MP Paul Flynn just suggested MPs were more mature than Brexit voters. For the record, his Newport seat voted 56 per cent to Leave.
And I do mean all practising Muslims not just "devout".
Go to a lot of places at night in Sweden right now and you will see groups of Syrian youths hanging out on street corners, wolf whistling and making comments to women passing by. It has a lot of female liberal friends of mine questioning their beliefs. I shudder to think what it would do to the British mood, given we turned against mass immigration a long time ago.
This point is key, regardless of whether one is pro or against Brexit.
If Parliament chooses to defy the will of the people as expressed in the referendum, well then, they will pay a heavy political price, rightly so. And this point too applies, regardless of which side one is on.
May should have involved Parliament from the start.
The UK's affiliations to the ECJ and the ECHR are seen as big barriers to that, and Brexit was about that too.
Its ugly and difficult to admit, but for some voters the referendum was about clearing the decks for a potential government in the future to do what it likes in regard to certain communities in this country.
odysseanproject @odysseanproject 19m ago
4/ Why? Because Parliamentary sovereignty means Govt cannot (& shd not try to) change domestic law by use of the prerogative
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/794172054455144448
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/794173305548894208
A non-EU citizen in the Schengen zone, even with indefinite leave to remain there, does NOT have any automatic right even to enter the UK for a short visit.
AAMOI, how do you expect the POTUS election to finish?
People expecting this harsh clamp down on Muslim cultural practices are day dreaming. I doubt you would get a majority in the Conservative party, let alone in parliament overall. Especially when Muslims are becoming a more political important voting group. It would need a UKIP government to happen.
The only way you get more Muslim integration is by restricting immigration and hope those that are here become moderate over time.
Anyway, the interesting result of a judgement to uphold the rule of Law in the UK, with the UK Parliament being Sovereign, has been the Kippers calling for civil unrest...
Funny that.
BTW:
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/18/the-nearest-run-thing/
The more time goes, she appears to quite incompetent. Cameron may not have done detail but, at least, took advice.
Do you know what outcome she's trying to achieve?
Interestingly Clinton has focused on states which aren't her 'must hold' ones, which might be a tactical error (or might not):
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/trump-clinton-electoral-college/506306/
Wisconsin stands out as having been neglected by the Democrats.
Trump faces significant difficulties getting over 266, if he does however then he could easily push Hillary down to 217 (Since I expect Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania all to be reasonably correlated)