Single market access is pretty important for those wwc Sunderland car workers. It seems like a sensible position for Labour to me.
Single market access can mean anything though.
Exactly. There are very few countries in the world without access to the single market. It's what kind of access that's important. That's what businesses will be looking for, as well as Brits who now or in the future want to live/work in the EU.
Surely what is meant is Single Markets membership or at least Customs Union?
To my mind being held to EU rules without a say in them, and paying for the privilege is a pretty poor deal.
Frankly, it depends on what the alternative is. If we lose more in tax take as a result of hard Brexit than the amount we would pay in contributions to remain part of the SM, then the contributions might be worth it (see Norway).
The Norwegians run a trade surplus with the EU. They pay to make a profit.
@Anna_Soubry: Note to PM:over 16 mill ppl including your good self didn't vote to leave the EU. It's time to bring ppl together not cause more division
@Anna_Soubry: Note to PM:over 16 mill ppl including your good self didn't vote to leave the EU. It's time to bring ppl together not cause more division
@Anna_Soubry: Note to PM:over 16 mill ppl including your good self didn't vote to leave the EU. It's time to bring ppl together not cause more division
By caving in to Anna Soubry. Note to PM: that's not gonna work....
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
I am beginning to wonder if Tezza will deliver Brexit.
If she wanted to thwart it, what might she do?
Put the 3 most incompetent ministers in charge of it? Check
Fight a losing legal battle? Check
Appeal? Check
Appeal to the ECJ is next on the list...
If she doesn't deliver then she's finished. And she'd bring the entire political system down along with her.
Ultimately, A50 notification is only going to be blocked if (a) the Supreme Court case is lost, then (b) a Parliamentary majority can be found to frustrate the necessary instrument moved to allow it to happen, AND (c) parties backing Remain win a Commons majority in the General Election which would inevitably follow such a veto.
(a) is quite likely, (b) appears very unlikely in the Commons, but might happen if their Lordships decide to commit institutional suicide, but (c) seems almost impossible. There were majorities to Leave in the bulk of constituencies, and the notion of the main Opposition party, Labour, going into an election campaign effectively saying that "we want to throw the people's verdict into the dustbin, for the sake of upholding free market capitalism (whilst running on an entirely contradictory slate of Far Left economic policies) and unlimited open borders migration" is as preposterous as it is suicidal. It would be like the Charge of the Light Brigade, the First Day of the Somme, Pickett's Charge, Cold Harbour, the Anglo-Zanzibar War, or perhaps just the biblical Slaughter of the Innocents. Whichever historical parallel for an unmitigated and catastrophic massacre you prefer to use, that is what it would be for them.
One way or another, Brexit is coming. It's all just a matter of how hard Continuity Remain kicks, screams and obstructs the process; how nasty the political atmosphere gets as a result; and how hard the anti-democrats are punished by the people if we are ultimately forced to have another vote.
Every day in the election campaign she will be asked 'what do you mean by the best deal for Britain?' What does that mean?
And the follow up question "Are you suggesting your opponents would pursue the worst deal for Britain?"
It wouldn't survive the first day of a GE campaign.
A manifesto with 24 blank pages where the policies should be.
Carnage.
In line with the views expressed by the voters of this country we will seek control of immigration going forward. We also recognise the importance of trade and will seek access to the European market on the best possible terms. Of course, any negotiation involves two parties and we look forward to working with our European partners in the the spirit of constructive engagement.
Next question please.
What are the best possible terms? Will you sacrifice jobs and growth to control immigration from the EU? Will pensioners living in Spain currently have to come home? And so on.
Any negotiation involves two parties and I am not in a position to comment on where the EU is prepared to compromise in order to establish a positive long-term cooperation with the United Kingdom. I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
If May does not want to answer questions others will do it for her. If she refuses to say whether she believes sacrificing jobs and growth in order to control immigration is worth it, she'll effectively be saying it is. That is the right wing view, of course, but it might not be that popular. And then you have to ask yourself whether the multiple mediocrities and downright incompetents in the cabinet will be able to maintain message discipline.
And every day, those asking it would be told to fuck off and wait for the outcome.
You want an election campaign in which the PM tells reporters to fuck off every time a reporter asks what her policies are?
The Brexiteers have completely lost their minds this morning
I've already said - there won't be an election until there is a deal done. And delivered. So you are just opening your mouth and making noise. Yet again.
It's amazing to see the remainers using exactly the same tactics that I saw used by the lefties in the student union in the 70's. delay, frustrate, and ultimately ignore the view of those they don't agree with. I'm waiting for a substantive vote to be slipped into parliament at 3.00am to reverse the referendum result
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
how nasty the political atmosphere gets as a result; and how hard the anti-democrats are punished by the people if we are ultimately forced to have another vote.
The Brexiteers have made the political atmosphere nasty enough already. the calls for civil disobedience from them were ugly. Luckily the anti-democrats who want to abandon the rule of law are not yet in the ascendancy
Every day in the election campaign she will be asked 'what do you mean by the best deal for Britain?' What does that mean?
And the follow up question "Are you suggesting your opponents would pursue the worst deal for Britain?"
It wouldn't survive the first day of a GE campaign.
A manifesto with 24 blank pages where the policies should be.
Carnage.
In line with the views expressed by the voters of this country we will seek control of immigration going forward. We also recognise the importance of trade and will seek access to the European market on the best possible terms. Of course, any negotiation involves two parties and we look forward to working with our European partners in the the spirit of constructive engagement.
Next question please.
What are the best possible terms? Will you sacrifice jobs and growth to control immigration from the EU? Will pensioners living in Spain currently have to come home? And so on.
Any negotiation involves two parties and I am not in a position to comment on where the EU is prepared to compromise in order to establish a positive long-term cooperation with the United Kingdom. I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
The problem with "I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome." is that the 'best possible outcome" is highly dependent on the perspective of the viewer. Worse, that perspective has been corrupted by the highly divergent and incompatible claims of the various leave campaigns.
It is going to be a very hard sell, and she will have to expend a large amount of political capital that she might not have, even with Labour's problems.
And every day, those asking it would be told to fuck off and wait for the outcome.
You want an election campaign in which the PM tells reporters to fuck off every time a reporter asks what her policies are?
The Brexiteers have completely lost their minds this morning
I've already said - there won't be an election until there is a deal done. And delivered. So you are just opening your mouth and making noise. Yet again.
There has to be an election by May 2020. It's very unlikely that a final deal will be done by then.
12 posts in and PB is straight back to arguing the same Brexit points by the same Remainers over and over and over again. Every thread is now simply becoming a parody of the previous thread but each just becomes even more bitter, twisted and entrenched. I really don't see the point anymore.......
But their pain still brings untold joy. It's like watching someone else's three year old having a screaming, writhing tantrum in a supermarket and knocking over a giant pyramid of baked bean tins.....
While the Brexiters are like 10-yr olds who knock on someone's door and then run away laughing.
Single market access is pretty important for those wwc Sunderland car workers. It seems like a sensible position for Labour to me.
Single market access can mean anything though.
Exactly. There are very few countries in the world without access to the single market. It's what kind of access that's important. That's what businesses will be looking for, as well as Brits who now or in the future want to live/work in the EU.
Surely what is meant is Single Market.membership or at least Customs Union?
To my mind being held to EU rules without a say in them, and paying for the privilege is a pretty poor deal.
And that's why we voted to Leave...
It is why Brexit means Hard Brexit. Membership with a say in the rules is a different thing entirely.
It's sweet that some people still think we had some kind of say in the rules before.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
Mr. Dadge, asking the people their opinion then conspiring to deny it is the behaviour of politicians who consider themselves the masters rather than the servants of the public.
The worst result for the UK would be staying in. Every unwelcome EU development would have the taint of treachery about it, as the political class forced us to remain in after we voted to leave.
Politics now is somewhat divisive and ugly. If the metropolitans gerrymander and conspire to deny the result, things will get much, much worse. If we leave (under whatever terms) things will gradually come back together.
As for 'playing the game', it was such games that led to Milo and Clodius.
At the moment there's a chance it really could be that close. I have it 268 v 268 but a few states either way will tip it.
It sounds like there is no chance of Robert Satiacum changing his mind in Washington.
We might end up with a real mess. It's so so close this election. I'm actually really surprised we're not full time on this in thread discussions. It's the most important political job in the world, after all.
how nasty the political atmosphere gets as a result; and how hard the anti-democrats are punished by the people if we are ultimately forced to have another vote.
The Brexiteers have made the political atmosphere nasty enough already. the calls for civil disobedience from them were ugly. Luckily the anti-democrats who want to abandon the rule of law are not yet in the ascendancy
Must you always talk such complete and utter bollocks?
@anthonypainter: Farage says he has had 'taxpayer funded hate mobs chasing him around Britain'. Goes completely unchallenged. Such is politics 2016. #marr
When I try to answer the $64,000 question 'How can even one person vote for Trump let alone half the US' I always think of Arizona. The most unfamiliar people I've met whose native language is English. The whole crew of 50 went to church every Sunday which was a first but that wasn't it. They had a macho culture which I haven't seen before that wasted hours every day." You want the camera mounted 6" off the ground?" We can hand hold it from a moving vehicle......" What!! and they 'whooped' after every take.......
p.s. my prediction is that Colorado will decide the election but that's only a hunch and it depends on one of the candidates not winning both Florida and Pennsylvania.
Trump has sealed up Ohio and it looks like he has now gone firm in previous wobbles like Utah and Arizona.
Every day in the election campaign she will be asked 'what do you mean by the best deal for Britain?' What does that mean?
And the follow up question "Are you suggesting your opponents would pursue the worst deal for Britain?"
It wouldn't survive the first day of a GE campaign.
A manifesto with 24 blank pages where the policies should be.
Carnage.
In line with the views expressed by the voters of this country we will seek control of immigration going forward. We also recognise the importance of trade and will seek access to the European market on the best possible terms. Of course, any negotiation involves two parties and we look forward to working with our European partners in the the spirit of constructive engagement.
Next question please.
What are the best possible terms? Will you sacrifice jobs and growth to control immigration from the EU? Will pensioners living in Spain currently have to come home? And so on.
Any negotiation involves two parties and I am not in a position to comment on where the EU is prepared to compromise in order to establish a positive long-term cooperation with the United Kingdom. I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
If May does not want to answer questions others will do it for her. If she refuses to say whether she believes sacrificing jobs and growth in order to control immigration is worth it, she'll effectively be saying it is. That is the right wing view, of course, but it might not be that popular. And then you have to ask yourself whether the multiple mediocrities and downright incompetents in the cabinet will be able to maintain message discipline.
No, she's not. It may be that the EU say F-Off. It's full membership or nothing. In which case it's a chose between upholding the decision made in the referendum or caving in. Until there are negotiations there is no certain picture of what might be possible
When I try to answer the $64,000 question 'How can even one person vote for Trump let alone half the US' I always think of Arizona. The most unfamiliar people I've met whose native language is English. The whole crew of 50 went to church every Sunday which was a first but that wasn't it. They had a macho culture which I haven't seen before that wasted hours every day." You want the camera mounted 6" off the ground?" We can hand hold it from a moving vehicle......" What!! and they 'whooped' after every take.......
At the moment there's a chance it really could be that close. I have it 268 v 268 but a few states either way will tip it.
It sounds like there is no chance of Robert Satiacum changing his mind in Washington.
We might end up with a real mess. It's so so close this election. I'm actually really surprised we're not full time on this in thread discussions. It's the most important political job in the world, after all.
I think it's fairly obvious: the only politically plausible outcome of a 52/48% vote is to be half in and half out, to use Peter Hitchens' phrase.
We were half-in. Norway's half-out. To reflect the vote, we'd better be 52% out which I interpret as Norway plus a few headline-grabbing but small gestures to Leavers. Anything else will lead to avoidable, continuing division and too much Leave will impoverish us given the costs imposed, including costs for tasks currently shared with the EU.
Back, er, on topic I bet a tiny amount on HRC at what seemed decent odds. Otherwise I think there's far too little value and too much risk in it unless you make 'trading the politics markets' a full time business.
When I try to answer the $64,000 question 'How can even one person vote for Trump let alone half the US' I always think of Arizona. The most unfamiliar people I've met whose native language is English. The whole crew of 50 went to church every Sunday which was a first but that wasn't it. They had a macho culture which I haven't seen before that wasted hours every day." You want the camera mounted 6" off the ground?" We can hand hold it from a moving vehicle......" What!! and they 'whooped' after every take.......
The fact they speak English in the US leads a lot of Brits to believe they know the place better than they really do. I have been there countless times and it continues to be among the most "foreign" countries I know. I feel European in America in a way that I never feel when I visit elsewhere.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
You think?
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
So probably unless it's very close we'll know the result around 1am, if Clinton wins convincingly we'll know around 12.30, and if it's a Clinton landslide we'll know when Trump loses Georgia around midnight.
Every day in the election campaign she will be asked 'what do you mean by the best deal for Britain?' What does that mean?
And the follow up question "Are you suggesting your opponents would pursue the worst deal for Britain?"
It wouldn't survive the first day of a GE campaign.
A manifesto with 24 blank pages where the policies should be.
Carnage.
In line with the views expressed by the voters of this country we will seek control of immigration going forward. We also recognise the importance of trade and will seek access to the European market on the best possible terms. Of course, any negotiation involves two parties and we look forward to working with our European partners in the the spirit of constructive engagement.
Next question please.
Yes, but parties are multi-headed monsters and the Tory party contains the full range from committed remainers through ultra-leavers. During an election campaign Tory MPs would all be giving their own slants on the issue and therein lies the problem.
In any case TND in yesterday's Sun gave a batch of other convincing reasons why May won't go for an election in 2017, including boundaries, the economy, and her probably needing that card in her hand come 2019.
Single market access is pretty important for those wwc Sunderland car workers. It seems like a sensible position for Labour to me.
Single market access can mean anything though.
Exactly. There are very few countries in the world without access to the single market. It's what kind of access that's important. That's what businesses will be looking for, as well as Brits who now or in the future want to live/work in the EU.
Surely what is meant is Single Market.membership or at least Customs Union?
To my mind being held to EU rules without a say in them, and paying for the privilege is a pretty poor deal.
And that's why we voted to Leave...
It is why Brexit means Hard Brexit. Membership with a say in the rules is a different thing entirely.
It's sweet that some people still think we had some kind of say in the rules before.
We certainly did. Indeed the Single Market was substantially the work of Mrs Thatchers government.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
Fine. May vs Corbyn in international negotiations. I'm sure she'd be happy with that comparison. (I've spent too long working in the private sector - always referencing "the team" rather than "me" when selling how great the firm is!)
Just to add. Farage had the opportunity to cherry-pick from 650 seats, and found that even then he still couldn't get elected. It's entirely understandable that he doesn't like democracy.
Think you have called this wrong TSE. Study US politics in detail and the polling. It's so close. My latest estimate has it 268 v 268. Florida is very very important but Trump could lose there and take PA. It might all come down to Colorado ... or those split electoral votes in Maine and Nebraska.
He's absolutely right to be hitting Clinton in her old firewall because polling shows she's no longer got it.
The Dem guy on #Marr nevertheless puts a credible argument when he says that it will be this weekend that many voters shift their perspective from what they oppose to thinking about Trump actually siting in the White House. Just as with Miliband, a swing away from the least credible candidate in the last few days would be likely.
At the moment there's a chance it really could be that close. I have it 268 v 268 but a few states either way will tip it.
It sounds like there is no chance of Robert Satiacum changing his mind in Washington.
We might end up with a real mess. It's so so close this election. I'm actually really surprised we're not full time on this in thread discussions. It's the most important political job in the world, after all.
There is a material risk that if Hillary gets elected but other damaging stuff gets released by the FBI before the Electoral College meets, there could be a full-scale revolt.
Mr. Nashe, and was on the winning side in the referendum.
If democracy doesn't work when the likes of Blair, Clegg etc don't agree with the result, then the electorate has a choice: turn to non-democratic means, or put up with not having their vote respected.
Neither of those options are good. And that's why efforts to undermine and reject the referendum result are repugnant.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
Fine. May vs Corbyn in international negotiations. I'm sure she'd be happy with that comparison. (I've spent too long working in the private sector - always referencing "the team" rather than "me" when selling how great the firm is!)
Sure - but when the team is visible and clearly not great it's best to avoid mentioning them. May v Corbyn, on the other hand, isn't even a contest. But a random donkey would beat Corbyn hands down too.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
Fine. May vs Corbyn in international negotiations. I'm sure she'd be happy with that comparison. (I've spent too long working in the private sector - always referencing "the team" rather than "me" when selling how great the firm is!)
Sure - but when the team is visible and clearly not great it's best to avoid mentioning them. May v Corbyn, on the other hand, isn't even a contest. But a random donkey would beat Corbyn hands down too.
If May does not want to answer questions others will do it for her.
Yes, that's a very good point, which we see in politics a lot.
X: "What is your policy on children?" Y: "I am reviewing our policy and will announce it in due course" X: "You are secretly in favour of slaying the first-born, aren't you?" Y: "No, of course not." X: "So will you deny you want to slay the second-born?" Y: "I'm not going to get into a running discussion."
It's uncomfortable and ultimately unsustainable. And anyway the lines will leak from the discussions, so what's the point? Better to set out the broad objectives and just avoid saying where the red lines are.
Every day in the election campaign she will be asked 'what do you mean by the best deal for Britain?' What does that mean?
And the follow up question "Are you suggesting your opponents would pursue the worst deal for Britain?"
It wouldn't survive the first day of a GE campaign.
A manifesto with 24 blank pages where the policies should be.
Carnage.
In line with the views expressed by the voters of this country we will seek control of immigration going forward. We also recognise the importance of trade and will seek access to the European market on the best possible terms. Of course, any negotiation involves two parties and we look forward to working with our European partners in the the spirit of constructive engagement.
Next question please.
What are the best possible terms? Will you sacrifice jobs and growth to control immigration from the EU? Will pensioners living in Spain currently have to come home? And so on.
Any negotiation involves two parties and I am not in a position to comment on where the EU is prepared to compromise in order to establish a positive long-term cooperation with the United Kingdom. I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
The problem with "I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome." is that the 'best possible outcome" is highly dependent on the perspective of the viewer. Worse, that perspective has been corrupted by the highly divergent and incompatible claims of the various leave campaigns.
It is going to be a very hard sell, and she will have to expend a large amount of political capital that she might not have, even with Labour's problems.
It comes down to May saying 'I pledge'. Then 'no comment'. People will just accuse her of being a 'mealy mouthed politician'. LIAR! LIAR!
Will you guarantee that we will stop paying in to the EU budget and commit to 350 million per week for the NHS ?
She will go for a parliamentary vote over a general election, but you can see why the preferred option is neither.
When I try to answer the $64,000 question 'How can even one person vote for Trump let alone half the US' I always think of Arizona. The most unfamiliar people I've met whose native language is English. The whole crew of 50 went to church every Sunday which was a first but that wasn't it. They had a macho culture which I haven't seen before that wasted hours every day." You want the camera mounted 6" off the ground?" We can hand hold it from a moving vehicle......" What!! and they 'whooped' after every take.......
When the status quo is seen as, at best, a more gradual decline, people don't just want change they think it is essential. Trump represents change; Clinton clearly doesn't. It's an age not just when politicians are despised but when people are prepared to take them on in the ballot. Clinton is the politician's politician.
On PB where we are interested in results, we're the opposite of the low information voter and know this to be nonsense. Trump is just as much a politician as Clinton is, and maybe a cynical politician with mental health issues at that.
Every day in the election campaign she will be asked 'what do you mean by the best deal for Britain?' What does that mean?
And the follow up question "Are you suggesting your opponents would pursue the worst deal for Britain?"
It wouldn't survive the first day of a GE campaign.
A manifesto with 24 blank pages where the policies should be.
Carnage.
In line with the views expressed by the voters of this country we will seek control of immigration going forward. We also recognise the importance of trade and will seek access to the European market on the best possible terms. Of course, any negotiation involves two parties and we look forward to working with our European partners in the the spirit of constructive engagement.
Next question please.
What are the best possible terms? Will you sacrifice jobs and growth to control immigration from the EU? Will pensioners living in Spain currently have to come home? And so on.
Any negotiation involves two parties and I am not in a position to comment on where the EU is prepared to compromise in order to establish a positive long-term cooperation with the United Kingdom. I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
The problem with "I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome." is that the 'best possible outcome" is highly dependent on the perspective of the viewer. Worse, that perspective has been corrupted by the highly divergent and incompatible claims of the various leave campaigns.
It is going to be a very hard sell, and she will have to expend a large amount of political capital that she might not have, even with Labour's problems.
Don't forget this is in an election campaign - it's a soundbite that sounds very sensible on the news. No capital expended. (I don't think she should call an election, but just refuting @ScottP 's assertion it would be "carnage")
I've already said - there won't be an election until there is a deal done.
Want a bet?
I have £10 of David's money to play with
Great - I get tie up a tenner until 2020....
But I'll offer you one of my special gold sovereign bets. You owe me a gold sovereign if no election by 1st January 2018; and I owe you a gold sovereign if there has been a general election by 1st January 2018.
Are you on? (Note: I am curently 2 for 2 on my pb.com gold sov bets....)
At the moment there's a chance it really could be that close. I have it 268 v 268 but a few states either way will tip it.
It sounds like there is no chance of Robert Satiacum changing his mind in Washington.
We might end up with a real mess. It's so so close this election. I'm actually really surprised we're not full time on this in thread discussions. It's the most important political job in the world, after all.
There is a material risk that if Hillary gets elected but other damaging stuff gets released by the FBI before the Electoral College meets, there could be a full-scale revolt.
If May does not want to answer questions others will do it for her.
Yes, that's a very good point, which we see in politics a lot.
X: "What is your policy on children?" Y: "I am reviewing our policy and will announce it in due course" X: "You are secretly in favour of slaying the first-born, aren't you?" Y: "No, of course not." X: "So will you deny you want to slay the second-born?" Y: "I'm not going to get into a running discussion."
It's uncomfortable and ultimately unsustainable. And anyway the lines will leak from the discussions, so what's the point? Better to set out the broad objectives and just avoid saying where the red lines are.
Mr. P, the truth is we had the argument. The electorate made a choice.
Mr. Palmer, there's to be a negotiation. If May had control of both sides of the table, it'd be a legitimate criticism.
People asking for commitment to specifics make as much sense as asking a man on the first date whether he's going to end up having sex. It's not his decision alone to make, he can't guarantee it, and only a fool would think he could.
Last night we had SeanT whining that others had to shut up. This morning we have had a series of Brexiteers whining that we are still discussing Brexit.
They know they are losing the arguments, so they want to stifle the debate.
Single market access is pretty important for those wwc Sunderland car workers. It seems like a sensible position for Labour to me.
Single market access can mean anything though.
Exactly. There are very few countries in the world without access to the single market. It's what kind of access that's important. That's what businesses will be looking for, as well as Brits who now or in the future want to live/work in the EU.
Surely what is meant is Single Markets membership or at least Customs Union?
To my mind being held to EU rules without a say in them, and paying for the privilege is a pretty poor deal.
It's a vague enough phrase it could mean many things. It's real purpose, given it cannot be guaranteed as we do t know the price for or level if the access, is to establish labour as soft Brexit and Tories as hard Brexit.
Frankly, may will probably be happy with that, softer brexit types seem to require a lot more wrangling to manage.
As Alastair Meekes pointed out a couple of days ago, the headlines attacking judges are only possible because last year the government with, so far as I can see, the support of the legal establishment, abolished the offence of Scandalising the Court.
When I try to answer the $64,000 question 'How can even one person vote for Trump let alone half the US' I always think of Arizona. The most unfamiliar people I've met whose native language is English. The whole crew of 50 went to church every Sunday which was a first but that wasn't it. They had a macho culture which I haven't seen before that wasted hours every day." You want the camera mounted 6" off the ground?" We can hand hold it from a moving vehicle......" What!! and they 'whooped' after every take.......
I lived in Georgia for 5 years, and agree with SO. I feel much more European when in America, something that I did not feel in Australia or NZ when living there. I did not feel so alien in Mexico either.
The closest place culturally that I have found to the USA is amongst the Afrikaaners of South Africa. Now they have got past Apartheid, they are a fascinating bunch. Welcoming to strangers, devoted to their land and its outdoors, with a history of pioneering, guns and the Reformed Church. Lovely people, but culturally quite alien to Europeans.
If May does hold an early election, I think it is improbable that a pro-Remain majority will sweep Corbyn or the Lib Dems into office.
She's favoured by both numbers and geography. 52% voted Leave, and the areas that voted Leave are either solid opposition territory, or very wealthy Conservative seats with huge majorities, where she can afford to lose votes. The Lab/Con marginals were solidly for Leave.
Mr. P, the truth is we had the argument. The electorate made a choice.
£350m for the NHS...
Now that the Brexiteers have admitted that was bollocks, it is possible the electorate might want to discuss the implications of their choice and where we go next?
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
You think?
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
May towers above Corbyn; Hammond beats McDonnell. Beyond that, the Tories still win, but the standard gets very low very quickly. Best keep them away from the cameras as you can't trust what they will say. Use Boris for internal confidence boosting.
The Tories are unbelievably fortunate that most Labour party members do not need a Labour government or fear a Tory one. If that changes before May calls a general election the political landscape could change very quickly.
If May does not want to answer questions others will do it for her.
Yes, that's a very good point, which we see in politics a lot.
X: "What is your policy on children?" Y: "I am reviewing our policy and will announce it in due course" X: "You are secretly in favour of slaying the first-born, aren't you?" Y: "No, of course not." X: "So will you deny you want to slay the second-born?" Y: "I'm not going to get into a running discussion."
It's uncomfortable and ultimately unsustainable. And anyway the lines will leak from the discussions, so what's the point? Better to set out the broad objectives and just avoid saying where the red lines are.
The "broad objective" is the best deal for the UK. Beyond that is negotiation.
Last night we had SeanT whining that others had to shut up. This morning we have had a series of Brexiteers whining that we are still discussing Brexit.
They know they are losing the arguments, so they want to stifle the debate.
Remainers have already lost the argument. By over a million votes.
When I try to answer the $64,000 question 'How can even one person vote for Trump let alone half the US' I always think of Arizona. The most unfamiliar people I've met whose native language is English. The whole crew of 50 went to church every Sunday which was a first but that wasn't it. They had a macho culture which I haven't seen before that wasted hours every day." You want the camera mounted 6" off the ground?" We can hand hold it from a moving vehicle......" What!! and they 'whooped' after every take.......
I lived in Georgia for 5 years, and agree with SO. I feel much more European when in America, something that I did not feel in Australia or NZ when living there. I did not feel so alien in Mexico either.
The closest place culturally that I have found to the USA is amongst the Afrikaaners of South Africa. Now they have got past Apartheid, they are a fascinating bunch. Welcoming to strangers, devoted to their land and its outdoors, with a history of pioneering, guns and the Reformed Church. Lovely people, but culturally quite alien to Europeans.
Very interesting comments.
I do think that Democrat on Marr sounds desperate: 'they will return to the fold this weekend' sounds like the language of someone who thinks they're losing it to me.
@RCorbettMEP: #farage now whipping it up on #marr, threatening violence in the streets - even if we leave EU and stay just in single market
This is one of the reasons why I fear that the single market / EEA approach is sadly a non-starter: it will be seen as a betrayal, and there will be chaos, whipped up by the likes of Farage. In the end they will force us to leave the EEA as well.
Mr. P, we had a referendum campaign, and a vote. The economic collapse prophesied by the Remain campaigns hasn't emerged (the pound has fallen significantly but growth remains good, as does employment).
It's despicable to try and keep asking the electorate the same question until they give you an answer with which you agree.
The electorate voted to leave, and expect us to leave, not to have the political class decide the plebs got it wrong.
Mr. P, the truth is we had the argument. The electorate made a choice.
£350m for the NHS...
Now that the Brexiteers have admitted that was bollocks, it is possible the electorate might want to discuss the implications of their choice and where we go next?
What you wish to do is to frustrate the choice that the voters have made.
So probably unless it's very close we'll know the result around 1am, if Clinton wins convincingly we'll know around 12.30, and if it's a Clinton landslide we'll know when Trump loses Georgia around midnight.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
You think?
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
May towers above Corbyn; Hammond beats McDonnell. Beyond that, the Tories still win, but the standard gets very low very quickly. Best keep them away from the cameras as you can't trust what they will say. Use Boris for internal confidence boosting.
The Tories are unbelievably fortunate that most Labour party members do not need a Labour government or fear a Tory one. If that changes before May calls a general election the political landscape could change very quickly.
Oh I agree but this fish has rotted from the top and so long as Corbyn is leader the tories get a free ride, even when they don't deserve it.
I am beginning to wonder if Tezza will deliver Brexit.
If she wanted to thwart it, what might she do?
Put the 3 most incompetent ministers in charge of it? Check
Fight a losing legal battle? Check
Appeal? Check
Appeal to the ECJ is next on the list...
If she doesn't deliver then she's finished. And she'd bring the entire political system down along with her.
Ultimately, A50 notification is only going to be blocked if (a) the Supreme Court case is lost, then (b) a Parliamentary majority can be found to frustrate the necessary instrument moved to allow it to happen, AND (c) parties backing Remain win a Commons majority in the General Election which would inevitably follow such a veto.
(a) is quite likely, (b) appears very unlikely in the Commons, but might happen if their Lordships decide to commit institutional suicide, but (c) seems almost impossible. There were majorities to Leave in the bulk of constituencies, and the notion of the main Opposition party, Labour, going into an election campaign effectively saying that "we want to throw the people's verdict into the dustbin, for the sake of upholding free market capitalism (whilst running on an entirely contradictory slate of Far Left economic policies) and unlimited open borders migration" is as preposterous as it is suicidal. It would be like the Charge of the Light Brigade, the First Day of the Somme, Pickett's Charge, Cold Harbour, the Anglo-Zanzibar War, or perhaps just the biblical Slaughter of the Innocents. Whichever historical parallel for an unmitigated and catastrophic massacre you prefer to use, that is what it would be for them.
One way or another, Brexit is coming. It's all just a matter of how hard Continuity Remain kicks, screams and obstructs the process; how nasty the political atmosphere gets as a result; and how hard the anti-democrats are punished by the people if we are ultimately forced to have another vote.
I think that's a mostly fair summary. The court case is just about process, it matters little in terms of choosing to exit. A parliamentary vote is about political management, its more difficult so there is more opportunity for frustration. But it's very hard to see an openly ignore thevreferendum party winning a snap ge. You'd think May had been an official leaver all along she is do committed, and she coukd not survive standing up and saying, you know what, after all this is not a good idea.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
You think?
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
May towers above Corbyn; Hammond beats McDonnell. Beyond that, the Tories still win, but the standard gets very low very quickly. Best keep them away from the cameras as you can't trust what they will say. Use Boris for internal confidence boosting.
The Tories are unbelievably fortunate that most Labour party members do not need a Labour government or fear a Tory one. If that changes before May calls a general election the political landscape could change very quickly.
Good grief SO, hyperbole much?
Even if every single Labour party members wanted a Labour government it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference. Labour polling is at its worst for generations - not just because of a few useless leaders, but because the party doesn't represent voters anymore. The problem is the party itself. A special interest group for metropolitans with outdated views for the 90s, let alone the 2010s. The world has moved on from socialism.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
You think?
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
May towers above Corbyn; Hammond beats McDonnell. Beyond that, the Tories still win, but the standard gets very low very quickly. Best keep them away from the cameras as you can't trust what they will say. Use Boris for internal confidence boosting.
The Tories are unbelievably fortunate that most Labour party members do not need a Labour government or fear a Tory one. If that changes before May calls a general election the political landscape could change very quickly.
Oh I agree but this fish has rotted from the top and so long as Corbyn is leader the tories get a free ride, even when they don't deserve it.
Yep. The Labour party is letting the entire country down currently.
Hunt may yet have an eye on a future leadership bid. Any chap, or lady, who does knows pissing off a massive section of the party now could scupper it. That may help keep those at or near the top united.
Last night we had SeanT whining that others had to shut up. This morning we have had a series of Brexiteers whining that we are still discussing Brexit.
They know they are losing the arguments, so they want to stifle the debate.
Losing the will to discuss the same issue with Remoaners 4 days after they 'won' the first leg of a post-war skirmish despite having lost the war.
We're Leaving. We're not fearful of losing the argument; we've won it.
I can pledge to the voters that we will achieve the best possible outcome.
"Are you saying PM that your opponents in this election would achieve the worst possible outcome? On what basis can you make that claim?"
Carnage
This election is about who you want to lead this country. The team we have put together is wonderful. Mr Corbyn and his team have a track record of [whatever the theme of the day is]. We believe the choice is clear.
May's probably best off not referencing her team. She should keep it to her versus Corbyn. Beyond that comparison the Tories lose their edge very quickly.
She might find a role for Hammond. Otherwise agreed.
You think?
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
May towers above Corbyn; Hammond beats McDonnell. Beyond that, the Tories still win, but the standard gets very low very quickly. Best keep them away from the cameras as you can't trust what they will say. Use Boris for internal confidence boosting.
The Tories are unbelievably fortunate that most Labour party members do not need a Labour government or fear a Tory one. If that changes before May calls a general election the political landscape could change very quickly.
Good grief SO, hyperbole much?
Even if every single Labour party members wanted a Labour government it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference. Labour polling is at its worst for generations - not just because of a few useless leaders, but because the party doesn't represent voters anymore. The problem is the party itself. A special interest group for metropolitans with outdated views for the 90s, let alone the 2010s. The world has moved on from socialism.
I agree. But I struggle to see the Tories representing anyone beyond a few key interest groups too. A competent opposition would be taking this thoroughly mediocre, hopelessly divided government to the cleaners.
Comments
Carnage
We on the other hand.......
Ultimately, A50 notification is only going to be blocked if (a) the Supreme Court case is lost, then (b) a Parliamentary majority can be found to frustrate the necessary instrument moved to allow it to happen, AND (c) parties backing Remain win a Commons majority in the General Election which would inevitably follow such a veto.
(a) is quite likely, (b) appears very unlikely in the Commons, but might happen if their Lordships decide to commit institutional suicide, but (c) seems almost impossible. There were majorities to Leave in the bulk of constituencies, and the notion of the main Opposition party, Labour, going into an election campaign effectively saying that "we want to throw the people's verdict into the dustbin, for the sake of upholding free market capitalism (whilst running on an entirely contradictory slate of Far Left economic policies) and unlimited open borders migration" is as preposterous as it is suicidal. It would be like the Charge of the Light Brigade, the First Day of the Somme, Pickett's Charge, Cold Harbour, the Anglo-Zanzibar War, or perhaps just the biblical Slaughter of the Innocents. Whichever historical parallel for an unmitigated and catastrophic massacre you prefer to use, that is what it would be for them.
One way or another, Brexit is coming. It's all just a matter of how hard Continuity Remain kicks, screams and obstructs the process; how nasty the political atmosphere gets as a result; and how hard the anti-democrats are punished by the people if we are ultimately forced to have another vote.
I really can't stand it any more,
But I'm going out to dinner...
https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/795138608638332928
Play up, and play the game.
It is going to be a very hard sell, and she will have to expend a large amount of political capital that she might not have, even with Labour's problems.
I have £10 of David's money to play with
The worst result for the UK would be staying in. Every unwelcome EU development would have the taint of treachery about it, as the political class forced us to remain in after we voted to leave.
Politics now is somewhat divisive and ugly. If the metropolitans gerrymander and conspire to deny the result, things will get much, much worse. If we leave (under whatever terms) things will gradually come back together.
As for 'playing the game', it was such games that led to Milo and Clodius.
It sounds like there is no chance of Robert Satiacum changing his mind in Washington.
We might end up with a real mess. It's so so close this election. I'm actually really surprised we're not full time on this in thread discussions. It's the most important political job in the world, after all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEfJrZ5IrvU
Trump has sealed up Ohio and it looks like he has now gone firm in previous wobbles like Utah and Arizona.
Probably.
We were half-in. Norway's half-out. To reflect the vote, we'd better be 52% out which I interpret as Norway plus a few headline-grabbing but small gestures to Leavers. Anything else will lead to avoidable, continuing division and too much Leave will impoverish us given the costs imposed, including costs for tasks currently shared with the EU.
Back, er, on topic I bet a tiny amount on HRC at what seemed decent odds. Otherwise I think there's far too little value and too much risk in it unless you make 'trading the politics markets' a full time business.
May-v-Corbyn
Hammond-v-McDonnell
Abbot-v-Anyone with a pulse.
Thornberry-v-Anyone even without a pulse.
Griffith-v-anyone who actually believes in defence.
Burgon-v-a tub of lard.
etc etc
I mean, this is a much weaker cabinet than Dave had but jeez....
In any case TND in yesterday's Sun gave a batch of other convincing reasons why May won't go for an election in 2017, including boundaries, the economy, and her probably needing that card in her hand come 2019.
If democracy doesn't work when the likes of Blair, Clegg etc don't agree with the result, then the electorate has a choice: turn to non-democratic means, or put up with not having their vote respected.
Neither of those options are good. And that's why efforts to undermine and reject the referendum result are repugnant.
Onus on May to fix it.
X: "What is your policy on children?"
Y: "I am reviewing our policy and will announce it in due course"
X: "You are secretly in favour of slaying the first-born, aren't you?"
Y: "No, of course not."
X: "So will you deny you want to slay the second-born?"
Y: "I'm not going to get into a running discussion."
It's uncomfortable and ultimately unsustainable. And anyway the lines will leak from the discussions, so what's the point? Better to set out the broad objectives and just avoid saying where the red lines are.
Will you guarantee that we will stop paying in to the EU budget and commit to 350 million per week for the NHS ?
She will go for a parliamentary vote over a general election, but you can see why the preferred option is neither.
On PB where we are interested in results, we're the opposite of the low information voter and know this to be nonsense. Trump is just as much a politician as Clinton is, and maybe a cynical politician with mental health issues at that.
But I'll offer you one of my special gold sovereign bets. You owe me a gold sovereign if no election by 1st January 2018; and I owe you a gold sovereign if there has been a general election by 1st January 2018.
Are you on? (Note: I am curently 2 for 2 on my pb.com gold sov bets....)
Mr. Palmer, there's to be a negotiation. If May had control of both sides of the table, it'd be a legitimate criticism.
People asking for commitment to specifics make as much sense as asking a man on the first date whether he's going to end up having sex. It's not his decision alone to make, he can't guarantee it, and only a fool would think he could.
Brexiteers are fearful of losing the argument
Last night we had SeanT whining that others had to shut up. This morning we have had a series of Brexiteers whining that we are still discussing Brexit.
They know they are losing the arguments, so they want to stifle the debate.
Frankly, may will probably be happy with that, softer brexit types seem to require a lot more wrangling to manage.
What did they think was going to happen?
I lived in Georgia for 5 years, and agree with SO. I feel much more European when in America, something that I did not feel in Australia or NZ when living there. I did not feel so alien in Mexico either.
The closest place culturally that I have found to the USA is amongst the Afrikaaners of South Africa. Now they have got past Apartheid, they are a fascinating bunch. Welcoming to strangers, devoted to their land and its outdoors, with a history of pioneering, guns and the Reformed Church. Lovely people, but culturally quite alien to Europeans.
She's favoured by both numbers and geography. 52% voted Leave, and the areas that voted Leave are either solid opposition territory, or very wealthy Conservative seats with huge majorities, where she can afford to lose votes. The Lab/Con marginals were solidly for Leave.
Now that the Brexiteers have admitted that was bollocks, it is possible the electorate might want to discuss the implications of their choice and where we go next?
The Tories are unbelievably fortunate that most Labour party members do not need a Labour government or fear a Tory one. If that changes before May calls a general election the political landscape could change very quickly.
I do think that Democrat on Marr sounds desperate: 'they will return to the fold this weekend' sounds like the language of someone who thinks they're losing it to me.
It's despicable to try and keep asking the electorate the same question until they give you an answer with which you agree.
The electorate voted to leave, and expect us to leave, not to have the political class decide the plebs got it wrong.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnLHoqj-XRM
It's what the biggest democratic vote this country has ever seen ordered up.
Even if every single Labour party members wanted a Labour government it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference. Labour polling is at its worst for generations - not just because of a few useless leaders, but because the party doesn't represent voters anymore. The problem is the party itself. A special interest group for metropolitans with outdated views for the 90s, let alone the 2010s. The world has moved on from socialism.
He is also talking calmly and sensibly about the Courts and the process
If any political party wishes to campaign on a platform of going back into the EU once we have left, then they are welcome to give it a try.
Or do you just want the "little people" to shut up and let the experts deal with it?
Wikileaks
Confidential auditor's report states that Clinton Foundation is engaging in illegal conduct (see attachment tab) https://t.co/N5eBnBArYi https://t.co/fL5nCmIWF1
Hunt may yet have an eye on a future leadership bid. Any chap, or lady, who does knows pissing off a massive section of the party now could scupper it. That may help keep those at or near the top united.
We're Leaving. We're not fearful of losing the argument; we've won it.