Enobling Farage would not neccesarily lose May support.
It would however be bad news for UKIP, and good news for the Lib Dems.
Perhaps as a favour to Trump, Theresa May can ask Farage to look for evidence of anti-Semitism at Breitbart, and then ennoble him as a thank-you for not finding any?
"You don't feel that the terms we should seek for Brexit are a matter for legitimate public debate for MPs, just none of their business? "
No, sod 'em. They only want to grandstand anyway. What constructive suggestion will they have? They'll ask for the moon on a stick and still whinge whatever the outcome. Don't humour them by letting them jump up and down yelling. "Please, miss, we're really important."
You don't think that people are more likely to behave more responsibly if they feel that they are actually important?
My view's always been consistent. British parliament trumps EU Parliament and unelected EU officials, but in a referendum the people speak directly. We only have a Parliament because we can't have referenda on every matter. It's a practicability issue.
Others may believe that democracy only works if the opinions they consider (subjectively) to be best always win. Children tend to think that too, but most grow out of it.
May trying out a new meme regarding providing a running commentary for brexit- "best way to get the worst outcome" Could work, but her delivery is off...
I suspect her problem is that a lot of people believe she doesn't have a plan.
She runs one of the leakiest governments of recent times,so we actually know a fair amount of what's going on. There are a lot of agendas. There is what I would describe as a wishlist, rather a plan. That's going to fall apart at the first contact with the enemy. What there isn't much of is anything that could accurately be described as strategy. Michel Barnier from the EU side does have a strategy: start with the exit terms; park any final agreements and haggle over the interim arrangement. Is that acceptable to the UK government? It looks like a fairly tough negotiating stance.
It's not "one of the leakiest governments of recent times". TM doesn't favour feeding the MSM beast with continuous titbits of propaganda. So the MSM makes up the news from speculation, gossip and shoddy reporting as in the case of the Deloitte memo.
Hmmm - the three Brexiteers brief the Torygraph; the Treasury briefs the Times. May slaps them all down!
Something I learned from reading about the Cambridge spies is that the Times used to have its own, private, daily Foreign Office briefing.
The Tory lead of 9% represents a swing from Lab to Con of 1.2% since May 2015 and would imply 12 Tory gains from Labour. However, 10 of the 12 MPs affected would enjoy first term incumbency so any gains or losses might be minimal in reality.
Labour going to score 33% at the next general election? Looks like the next polling disaster is already in the making...
February 2020: John Harris in some "safe" (Non London) Labour seat - say Coventry Northwest: "I haven't actually met anyone who says they're going to vote for Corbyn"
FWIW, Ipsos' Con/Lab figures continue to go up and down like a rollercoaster, and its Ukip figure is still well adrift of all the other pollsters.
Look at the overall trend of all the national VI polls and things have been pretty close to static since Theresa May became PM in mid-July. There's still no clearly observable trend upwards or downwards for any of the main parties. The consistent Tory leads - for a Government in mid-term which is also dealing with huge challenges - are still remarkable.
I think the issue is whether the Conservatives can hold on to their 40%+ share and Labour can move from their 30% share toward 35%.
Governments often lead between elections - I don't think we can say the May Government is in its midterm just yet, that will take another 12-18 months. What we can probably say is the honeymoon period is coming to an end.
I would suggest that 'midterm' is now fairly imminent and will arrive at the beginning of 2017.The Tories are still probably being flattered by a May honeymoon effect - even if this is now fading. You are correct to suggest that Governments often enjoy a polling lead at this stage of a Parliament. At the end of 1988 - 18 months post 1987 election - the polls were giving the Tories a lead of 10/11 points.
"You don't feel that the terms we should seek for Brexit are a matter for legitimate public debate for MPs, just none of their business? "
No, sod 'em. They only want to grandstand anyway. What constructive suggestion will they have? They'll ask for the moon on a stick and still whinge whatever the outcome. Don't humour them by letting them jump up and down yelling. "Please, miss, we're really important."
That doesn't sound much like: 'Take back control - Parliament is sovereign.'
CD's line is essentially an argument for oligarchy. MPs? Just tiresome attention-seekers. Parliament? An annoying distraction from getting on with the job.
What is alarming is not that someone thinks that, but that CD is by no means normally especially extreme, yet doesn't see any problem in his attitude.
Labour going to score 33% at the next general election? Looks like the next polling disaster is already in the making...
33% might just be accurate in the hypothetical event of an election tomorrow with no warning.
In the real world there will be six weeks of Conservative billboards with Corbyn/McDonnell quotes about the IRA/Hamas/printing money, perhaps plus a concerted UKIP campaign in the North.
May trying out a new meme regarding providing a running commentary for brexit- "best way to get the worst outcome" Could work, but her delivery is off...
I suspect her problem is that a lot of people believe she doesn't have a plan.
She runs one of the leakiest governments of recent times,so we actually know a fair amount of what's going on. There are a lot of agendas. There is what I would describe as a wishlist, rather a plan. That's going to fall apart at the first contact with the enemy. What there isn't much of is anything that could accurately be described as strategy. Michel Barnier from the EU side does have a strategy: start with the exit terms; park any final agreements and haggle over the interim arrangement. Is that acceptable to the UK government? It looks like a fairly tough negotiating stance.
It's not "one of the leakiest governments of recent times". TM doesn't favour feeding the MSM beast with continuous titbits of propaganda. So the MSM makes up the news from speculation, gossip and shoddy reporting as in the case of the Deloitte memo.
Hmmm - the three Brexiteers brief the Torygraph; the Treasury briefs the Times. May slaps them all down!
May just isn't interested in that sort of nonsense game playing, unlike the three musketeers and the continuity Osborne faction.
It makes a nonsense of her claim that revealing anything at all about her negotiating principles, indeed whether she even has any, would lead to a bad result - when her own government is revealing stuff left right and centre.
And bear in mind her promises to Nissan, made dependent on negotiations that haven't happened, pre-empted a large part of those negotiations. Britain needs to be in a customs union, at least as far automotive is concerned if she is not to go back to Nissan and say, sorry deal's off, and run the embarrassing risk of Nissan leaving Sunderland after all and/or demanding a further pound of flesh. Knowing this, the EU will say, Hmm, let's name our price...
"What is alarming is not that someone thinks that, but that CD is by no means normally especially extreme, yet doesn't see any problem in his attitude."
Diddums, Dr P.
I'm sure there are some good MPs around, but they never get anywhere near power. Or if they do, they end up corrupted (as Baron Acton said).
Labour going to score 33% at the next general election? Looks like the next polling disaster is already in the making...
33% might just be accurate in the hypothetical event of an election tomorrow with no warning.
In the real world there will be six weeks of Conservative billboards with Corbyn/McDonnell quotes about the IRA/Hamas/printing money, perhaps plus a concerted UKIP campaign in the North.
Opinium had Labour on 32% just over a week ago.
On the whole, Governments tend to lose ground in the formal election campaign period.
Labour going to score 33% at the next general election? Looks like the next polling disaster is already in the making...
33% might just be accurate in the hypothetical event of an election tomorrow with no warning.
In the real world there will be six weeks of Conservative billboards with Corbyn/McDonnell quotes about the IRA/Hamas/printing money, perhaps plus a concerted UKIP campaign in the North.
Opinium had Labour on 32% just over a week ago.
On the whole, Governments tend to lose ground in the formal election campaign period.
I like the way 18 months into a 60 month parliament is somehow now 'mid-term'.
Mid-term is a period, not a moment. Politically, it's that time after the government starts doing unpopular stuff but before it's seriously preparing in policy and presentation for the end-of-parliament election.
Labour going to score 33% at the next general election? Looks like the next polling disaster is already in the making...
33% might just be accurate in the hypothetical event of an election tomorrow with no warning.
In the real world there will be six weeks of Conservative billboards with Corbyn/McDonnell quotes about the IRA/Hamas/printing money, perhaps plus a concerted UKIP campaign in the North.
Opinium had Labour on 32% just over a week ago.
On the whole, Governments tend to lose ground in the formal election campaign period.
And you are believing these polls because...?
I am not believing or disbelieving anything but simply inviting people like you to consider the evidence available.
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
FPT: Mr. 43, a senior judge shouldn't be flying a kite to meddle in politics.
Doesn't exactly fill me with confidence she'll be neutral when it comes to judging the case.
Have you even read the speech she gave in which these remarks were made? Its fairly clear that she was laying out both sides arguments but not coming to any conclusion on them.
Introducing to the debate the argument that a 'minimal' Act would be inadequate to trigger A50 is, however, accepting that that position is at least arguable, which suggests to me a willingness to consider two immense innovations. Firstly, that the Supreme Court can in effect strike down legislation by declaring it 'inadequate' (a possibility made all the more real by her assertion that the Supreme Court was now the 'guardian of the constitution'), and secondly - and consequently - placing some pieces of legislation at a higher status than others, when traditionally all primary legislation was of equal legal standing.
The 1972 Act has had a special status since at least the Marleasing decision where it was concluded that subsequent legislation had to be construed in a way that was consistent with still being in the EU and compliant with EU law unless Parliament was very clear about it. Arguably the legislation setting up the Scottish Parliament now has similar status.
It is easier to kick out and disbar the President of the United States from their job than it is easier to kick out and disbar Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour leadership
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
"unable to discharge" is a very high bar.
Mr Speaker, Mr Senate President Pro Tempore, the President of the United States is unable to discharge his office because he's a national security risk or he cannot go to summits without trying to grab the pussies of foreign ministers, PMs, Presidents, and where applicable, if they have wives.
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
"unable to discharge" is a very high bar.
Mr Speaker, Mr Senate President Pro Tempore, the President of the United States is unable to discharge his office because he's a national security risk or he cannot go to summits without trying to grab the pussies of foreign ministers, PMs, Presidents, and where applicable, if they have wives.
The scenarios I have outlined below are far more probable than this wishful thinking.
It is easier to kick out and disbar the President of the United States from their job than it is easier to kick out and disbar Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour leadership
Donald Trump certainly has nothing on Owen Smith's misogyny.
Just imagine if some of those court cases do turn messy for Trump.
My bold prediction for a Trump Presidency, assuming he goes the full term, he and his administration will break all records for using 'Executive privilege'
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
"unable to discharge" is a very high bar.
Mr Speaker, Mr Senate President Pro Tempore, the President of the United States is unable to discharge his office because he's a national security risk or he cannot go to summits without trying to grab the pussies of foreign ministers, PMs, Presidents, and where applicable, if they have wives.
The scenarios I have outlined below are far more probable than this wishful thinking.
I know but it is interesting
1) This is already being talked about
2) There's a route to dump Trump if the need arises.
Enobling Farage would not neccesarily lose May support.
It would however be bad news for UKIP, and good news for the Lib Dems.
May does, however, risk becoming associated with lots of things she wouldn't have chosen. She is already tied to Brexit despite (nominally at least) having opposed it. She risks becoming associated with Trump given that she can hardly align with the Democrats. Zac is already tacitly supported by UKIP in Richmond; being associated with promoting Farage to the upper house would be 'brave' (in a "Prime Minister" sense).
It is easier to kick out and disbar the President of the United States from their job than it is easier to kick out and disbar Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour leadership
Well, it's very doubtful that 2/3 of the House of Commons would have voted to remove Corbyn
I like the way 18 months into a 60 month parliament is somehow now 'mid-term'.
Mid-term is a period, not a moment. Politically, it's that time after the government starts doing unpopular stuff but before it's seriously preparing in policy and presentation for the end-of-parliament election.
Midterm is a long period, from the end of the post-election/post-selection honeymoon through to the point, not that long before the GE, when people stop judging just the government and actually start looking at opposition parties as potential alternatives.
It is easier to kick out and disbar the President of the United States from their job than it is easier to kick out and disbar Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour leadership
Well, it's very doubtful that 2/3 of the House of Commons would have voted to remove Corbyn
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
"unable to discharge" is a very high bar.
And so it should be!
The question is, would the Democrats prefer to get rid of him, or to leave him in place as a Republican figurehead?
It's sad that these things are even discussed though, those wanting to overturn the election result are acting very much like those who wish to see Brexit stopped.
The Mori figures still represent a swing to the Conservatives from both Lab and LDs, from 2015, in mid-term and with what might charitably be described as policy formation still in progress.
Lots of straws being clutched there . Look at the data tables . Conservatives lose 16 2015 Conservative voters to Lib Dems and gain 1 2015 Lib Dem voter back Conservatives lose 8 2015 Conservative voters to Labour and gain 8 2015 Labour voters back Labour lose 12 2015 Labour voters to Lib Dems and gain 5 2015 Lib Dem voters back 102 Lib Dem voters in sample reduced to 89 after weighting 53 UKIP voters in sample increased to 73 after weighting Conservative and Labour voters numbers almost unchanged by weighting .
Are you saying that the reason the LibDems success in elections hasn't been reflected in the polls is that the pollsters put in bigger weighting 'adjustments' than they used to?
Local by-elections are different from Parliamentary elections. Pollsters very rarely poll the former, but do poll the latter.
While that's true, I do think it's interesting that in the run up to GE2015, pollsters struggled to find more than 15% or so of respondents who'd admit to voting LD in 2010. People regretted voting LD and lied about it. This led to all the pollsters models weighting the LDs up in the run up to the General (their attempts to get a balanced sample led them to overweight the small number of people who admitted having voted LD).
By contrast, almost all the telephone pollsters now seem to be finding 9-14% of people who claimed to have voted LD, and you are seeing corresponding downweighting.
Personal view: in a GE tomorrow, the LDs would get around 13% of the vote.
Surely the response is likely to be dependent on the cause! Many would fight to defend their country from invasion who would have no wish to participate in British aggression in Iraq.
I'm going to go with my gut feeling that Theresa May is going to play a blinder with regards to both Brexit and Donald Trump.
Whilst the rest of the EU Leaders are still indulging in their "sulk-a-rama" and don't appear to have a coherent thought re Donald Trump and NATO, in particular, then she is going to steal a march and be the first European Leader to meet with him (asap). The fact that Nigel Farage has gone "quiet" (finally) suggests that there is a lot going on behind the scenes.
The harsh reality is Donald Trump winning the Presidential Election was probably the best thing for this country. I believe it is going to strengthen our hand in the EU negotiations, and our "trump" card is going to be security.
The Mori figures still represent a swing to the Conservatives from both Lab and LDs, from 2015, in mid-term and with what might charitably be described as policy formation still in progress.
Lots of straws being clutched there . Look at the data tables . Conservatives lose 16 2015 Conservative voters to Lib Dems and gain 1 2015 Lib Dem voter back Conservatives lose 8 2015 Conservative voters to Labour and gain 8 2015 Labour voters back Labour lose 12 2015 Labour voters to Lib Dems and gain 5 2015 Lib Dem voters back 102 Lib Dem voters in sample reduced to 89 after weighting 53 UKIP voters in sample increased to 73 after weighting Conservative and Labour voters numbers almost unchanged by weighting .
Are you saying that the reason the LibDems success in elections hasn't been reflected in the polls is that the pollsters put in bigger weighting 'adjustments' than they used to?
Local by-elections are different from Parliamentary elections. Pollsters very rarely poll the former, but do poll the latter.
While that's true, I do think it's interesting that in the run up to GE2015, pollsters struggled to find more than 15% or so of respondents who'd admit to voting LD in 2010. People regretted voting LD and lied about it. This led to all the pollsters models weighting the LDs up in the run up to the General (their attempts to get a balanced sample led them to overweight the small number of people who admitted having voted LD).
By contrast, almost all the telephone pollsters now seem to be finding 9-14% of people who claimed to have voted LD, and you are seeing corresponding downweighting.
Personal view: in a GE tomorrow, the LDs would get around 13% of the vote.
I would pitch the LibDems lower than that at 9/10% simply because they now have so much competition as the NOTA option.Many who in the past would have supported them on that basis will now opt for the Greens or UKIP.
Surely the response is likely to be dependent on the cause! Many would fight to defend their country from invasion who would have no wish to participate in British aggression in Iraq.
The worrying thing about the data is the top two. Totally incompatible with each other and both having nuclear weapons.
2) There's a route to dump Trump if the need arises.
The establishment have been trying to stop Trump ever since he declared. What's new?
The bottom line is that as long as he has an army of supporters they can't touch him.
It is easier to dump Trump as POTUS than it is to dump Trump as the nominee.
His supporters aren't that well represented in Congress, and maybe not even in the executive branch.
Congressmen have an electorate to face. 'OperationPurgeCucks' will go into overdrive if any Republicans don't toe the Trump line.
There are two years before any further Congressional elections. That would be enough time for any impeachment to run its entire course before any electoral consequences, thus also reducing the probability of such consequences.
The Mori figures still represent a swing to the Conservatives from both Lab and LDs, from 2015, in mid-term and with what might charitably be described as policy formation still in progress.
Lots of straws being clutched there . Look at the data tables . Conservatives lose 16 2015 Conservative voters to Lib Dems and gain 1 2015 Lib Dem voter back Conservatives lose 8 2015 Conservative voters to Labour and gain 8 2015 Labour voters back Labour lose 12 2015 Labour voters to Lib Dems and gain 5 2015 Lib Dem voters back 102 Lib Dem voters in sample reduced to 89 after weighting 53 UKIP voters in sample increased to 73 after weighting Conservative and Labour voters numbers almost unchanged by weighting .
Are you saying that the reason the LibDems success in elections hasn't been reflected in the polls is that the pollsters put in bigger weighting 'adjustments' than they used to?
Local by-elections are different from Parliamentary elections. Pollsters very rarely poll the former, but do poll the latter.
While that's true, I do think it's interesting that in the run up to GE2015, pollsters struggled to find more than 15% or so of respondents who'd admit to voting LD in 2010. People regretted voting LD and lied about it. This led to all the pollsters models weighting the LDs up in the run up to the General (their attempts to get a balanced sample led them to overweight the small number of people who admitted having voted LD).
By contrast, almost all the telephone pollsters now seem to be finding 9-14% of people who claimed to have voted LD, and you are seeing corresponding downweighting.
Personal view: in a GE tomorrow, the LDs would get around 13% of the vote.
But, as far as LibDem prospects are concerned, it doesn't make a great deal of difference whether they are polling 13% or 23%. What matters is whether they can gather in 45% of the vote in the up to 50 locations where defeating the sitting (mostly) Tory MP is a realistic proposition. For sure, starting on 23% nationally makes it a lot easier, but gaining 10% support everywhere won't do it for them.
Alot of gas about #NeverTrump in the run up, not so much #OnlyObama that seemed to happen to alot of black voters in key swing states - and #OnlyTrump for WWC rural voters.
"You don't feel that the terms we should seek for Brexit are a matter for legitimate public debate for MPs, just none of their business? "
No, sod 'em. They only want to grandstand anyway. What constructive suggestion will they have? They'll ask for the moon on a stick and still whinge whatever the outcome. Don't humour them by letting them jump up and down yelling. "Please, miss, we're really important."
That doesn't sound much like: 'Take back control - Parliament is sovereign.'
CD's line is essentially an argument for oligarchy. MPs? Just tiresome attention-seekers. Parliament? An annoying distraction from getting on with the job.
What is alarming is not that someone thinks that, but that CD is by no means normally especially extreme, yet doesn't see any problem in his attitude.
There certainly has been an alarming rise in some quarters to seeing any obstacle, reasonable or not legal or not, in the way of a vote I was in favour of, as being unworthy and should be ignored or removed, often purely on the basis of motivation of those seeking obstacles. In the case of recent court cases, even though the government did not take this line, the argument that the government's interpretation of the extent of the powers granted to it by parliament should not be queried by the courts or parliaments is surely worrisome. Ok, in this instance the process means a frustration caused by those who wish to thwart a democratic mandate, but better that, that we work a bit harder, than to suggest government be able to decide for itself what it can and cannot do. They are not always right (nor are courts, but that's why we have higher courts, and why parliament can change the law if it needs to)
Alot of gas about #NeverTrump in the run up, not so much #OnlyObama that seemed to happen to alot of black voters in key swing states - and #OnlyTrump for WWC rural voters.
Under-represented in the crucial battleground state of the New York media set, mind.
Does anyone agree with me, that the media in this country has never been so inept, so dire and justso embarrassingly awful.
I see Sophy Ridge (SKY) is being given a new Sunday Politics Show. WHY? Do we really need another one, with the same people just dashing from studio to studio?
I'm going to go with my gut feeling that Theresa May is going to play a blinder with regards to both Brexit and Donald Trump.
Whilst the rest of the EU Leaders are still indulging in their "sulk-a-rama" and don't appear to have a coherent thought re Donald Trump and NATO, in particular, then she is going to steal a march and be the first European Leader to meet with him (asap). The fact that Nigel Farage has gone "quiet" (finally) suggests that there is a lot going on behind the scenes.
The harsh reality is Donald Trump winning the Presidential Election was probably the best thing for this country. I believe it is going to strengthen our hand in the EU negotiations, and our "trump" card is going to be security.
That is my assessment also - the possibility of a NAFTA deal for the UK and US (partial) disengagement from NATO strengthening the UK's hand vis-a-vis the EU. However, I have no feel yet how well May will do playing that hand, except all this hand-wringing and whinging is for the birds until we have any evidence, and there won't be any of that until the first shots are fired in earnest.
May trying out a new meme regarding providing a running commentary for brexit- "best way to get the worst outcome" Could work, but her delivery is off...
I suspect her problem is that a lot of people believe she doesn't have a plan. She runs one of the leakiest governments of recent times,so we actually know a fair amount of what's going on. There are a lot of agendas. There is what I would describe as a wishlist, rather a plan. That's going to fall apart at the first contact with the enemy. What there isn't much of is anything that could accurately be described as strategy. Michel Barnier from the EU side does have a strategy: start with the exit terms; park any final agreements and haggle over the interim arrangement. Is that acceptable to the UK government? It looks like a fairly tough negotiating stance.
It's not "one of the leakiest governments of recent times". TM doesn't favour feeding the MSM beast with continuous titbits of propaganda. So the MSM makes up the news from speculation, gossip and shoddy reporting as in the case of the Deloitte memo.
Hmmm - the three Brexiteers brief the Torygraph; the Treasury briefs the Times. May slaps them all down!
But nobody takes any notice of Mrs May, do they? She isn`t a serious prime minister.
F**k, how is that even possible - is the control fully manual with no safety backups?
From the discussion a few days ago, it appears the speed limit elsewhere is higher, and only the max speed is capped. The tram doesn't "know" it's on a 12 MPH section.
Just imagine if some of those court cases do turn messy for Trump.
My bold prediction for a Trump Presidency, assuming he goes the full term, he and his administration will break all records for using 'Executive privilege'
I still find it unlikely that there will be any serious moves to dump Trump before the next primary. GOP insiders have the next 30 months to get their house in order and present an alternative to Trump II, especially to the blue collar whites that delivered Trump to the WH. IMO, Trump isn't going to be a disaster, but nor will he deliver all the reforms he has promised. That will see him win a second term as more traditional GOP voters fall in line and he holds on to the blue collar Dems in the mid-west. If he succeeds in deporting illegal immigrants it will be a game-changer for border states as well. I'd like to see a breakdown of how the votes went for amnesty migrants vs by the book legal migrants. The latter group will have been much closer than the former for Trump, I'd guess 10/90 in the former vs 35/65 in the latter. Without being able to import a new voter base in Texas the Dems will find making gains there very, very tough, especially if Trump gets the GOP traditional base on board for 2020 (assuming he runs).
As it stands, unless Trump does something totally outrageous which leads to impeachment (not ruling it out), he's here until 2020 and does better in TX, NV, AZ and CA than this time. The loss in Orange County was a classic example of the GOP base turning their nose up at Trump, getting them back on board for 2020 means it will be an easy win.
Interesting little snippet in the Wiki page on the 25th amendment. Gerald Ford is the only man to have been Vice President and President without being elected to either.
I think I knew that but it was still a little startling.
Surely the response is likely to be dependent on the cause! Many would fight to defend their country from invasion who would have no wish to participate in British aggression in Iraq.
The worrying thing about the data is the top two. Totally incompatible with each other and both having nuclear weapons.
Surely it mainly illustrates that what we would call the 'middle class' (and upper) in each of these countries will generally say 'no'? Look at it in that light, and the data seems almost entirely explained. Factor in residual anti-militarism in the WWII aggressors and you are there.
I would pitch the LibDems lower than that at 9/10% simply because they now have so much competition as the NOTA option.Many who in the past would have supported them on that basis will now opt for the Greens or UKIP.
I think you are running about two years behind the times, Mr Justin.
''I see Sophy Ridge (SKY) is being given a new Sunday Politics Show. WHY? Do we really need another one, with the same people just dashing from studio to studio?''
I commented last night to one of your posts about computer vs humans that I have just started James Case's book, Competition: The Birth of a New Science, and that, in that, he addresses why machines are poorer at multi-player games, like Go, than two-player, zero-sum games.
I have not got fully into his argumentation yet, but you seemed to be implying that computers do well at Go. Is his data out of date (the book is copyright 2007 so was probably written in 2006), or is he still right that the very best human players of Go still beat machines?
Seems to be clutching at straws. If Trump doesn't want to quit he can overrule the declaration of him being incapacitated, as per the same amendment.
This bit helps to force Trump out after Trump sends the letter that's he's fine to act as President
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
"unable to discharge" is a very high bar.
And so it should be!
The question is, would the Democrats prefer to get rid of him, or to leave him in place as a Republican figurehead?
It's sad that these things are even discussed though, those wanting to overturn the election result are acting very much like those who wish to see Brexit stopped.
The 25th Amendment was nearly used after the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan.
I commented last night to one of your posts about computer vs humans that I have just started James Case's book, Competition: The Birth of a New Science, and that, in that, he addresses why machines are poorer at multi-player games, like Go, than two-player, zero-sum games.
I have not got fully into his argumentation yet, but you seemed to be implying that computers do well at Go. Is his data out of date (the book is copyright 2007 so was probably written in 2006), or is he still right that the very best human players of Go still beat machines?
Doesn't GO have black tiles and white tiles for two players (or teams)?
I commented last night to one of your posts about computer vs humans that I have just started James Case's book, Competition: The Birth of a New Science, and that, in that, he addresses why machines are poorer at multi-player games, like Go, than two-player, zero-sum games.
I have not got fully into his argumentation yet, but you seemed to be implying that computers do well at Go. Is his data out of date (the book is copyright 2007 so was probably written in 2006), or is he still right that the very best human players of Go still beat machines?
Go is a two player game, it is "too complex" to 'solve'
Computers were terrible at it previously.
Deep Mind thrashed Lee Sedol, the world champ at it - Now. It doesn't 'solve' the game, but uses evolving algorithms as it plays itself.
Comments
"'Take back control - Parliament is sovereign.'
My view's always been consistent. British parliament trumps EU Parliament and unelected EU officials, but in a referendum the people speak directly. We only have a Parliament because we can't have referenda on every matter. It's a practicability issue.
Others may believe that democracy only works if the opinions they consider (subjectively) to be best always win. Children tend to think that too, but most grow out of it.
"You don't think that people are more likely to behave more responsibly if they feel that they are actually important"
The people ... yes. MPs ... no.
Sam Harris, gets it again.
Everyone: Good afternoon, Mr Dancer.
You are correct to suggest that Governments often enjoy a polling lead at this stage of a Parliament. At the end of 1988 - 18 months post 1987 election - the polls were giving the Tories a lead of 10/11 points.
https://twitter.com/johnprescott/status/798870618418671616
Mr. Hopkins/everyone, thanks.
What is alarming is not that someone thinks that, but that CD is by no means normally especially extreme, yet doesn't see any problem in his attitude.
We have more leverage than a wine vs fish stand-off.
Or perhaps we could send Prescott round to punch them...
In the real world there will be six weeks of Conservative billboards with Corbyn/McDonnell quotes about the IRA/Hamas/printing money, perhaps plus a concerted UKIP campaign in the North.
And bear in mind her promises to Nissan, made dependent on negotiations that haven't happened, pre-empted a large part of those negotiations. Britain needs to be in a customs union, at least as far automotive is concerned if she is not to go back to Nissan and say, sorry deal's off, and run the embarrassing risk of Nissan leaving Sunderland after all and/or demanding a further pound of flesh. Knowing this, the EU will say, Hmm, let's name our price...
Diddums, Dr P.
I'm sure there are some good MPs around, but they never get anywhere near power. Or if they do, they end up corrupted (as Baron Acton said).
On the whole, Governments tend to lose ground in the formal election campaign period.
https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/798880228923871233
And you are believing these polls because...?
Second in the queue.
May: +24 (+8)
Government -4 (+12)
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session.
If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.[3]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_4:_Vice_Presidential.E2.80.93Cabinet_declaration
Seems unlikely to me. What's the scenario(s)?
It is easier to kick out and disbar the President of the United States from their job than it is easier to kick out and disbar Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour leadership
"unable to discharge" is a very high bar.
If Trump can get a full on boom happening during his term then he could do a Bush to Trump's Reagen.
But that's speculating a long way ahead right now.
Biggest short term risk to Trump is the combined morbidity and assassination risk, he's got alot of enemies and is an obese 70 year old man.
Claims ex-PCC Shaun Wright lied under oath to MPs about the Rotherham abuse scandal are to be referred to police https://t.co/hvOG1otqUn https://t.co/p962McU7rc
My bold prediction for a Trump Presidency, assuming he goes the full term, he and his administration will break all records for using 'Executive privilege'
1) This is already being talked about
2) There's a route to dump Trump if the need arises.
Willing to fight for country.
Pakistan: 89%
India: 75%
Turkey: 73%
China: 71%
Russia: 59%
US: 44%
UK: 27%
Germany: 18%
Japan: 11%
(Gallup)
The bottom line is that as long as he has an army of supporters they can't touch him.
His supporters aren't that well represented in Congress, and maybe not even in the executive branch.
The question is, would the Democrats prefer to get rid of him, or to leave him in place as a Republican figurehead?
It's sad that these things are even discussed though, those wanting to overturn the election result are acting very much like those who wish to see Brexit stopped.
By contrast, almost all the telephone pollsters now seem to be finding 9-14% of people who claimed to have voted LD, and you are seeing corresponding downweighting.
Personal view: in a GE tomorrow, the LDs would get around 13% of the vote.
Whilst the rest of the EU Leaders are still indulging in their "sulk-a-rama" and don't appear to have a coherent thought re Donald Trump and NATO, in particular, then she is going to steal a march and be the first European Leader to meet with him (asap). The fact that Nigel Farage has gone "quiet" (finally) suggests that there is a lot going on behind the scenes.
The harsh reality is Donald Trump winning the Presidential Election was probably the best thing for this country. I believe it is going to strengthen our hand in the EU negotiations, and our "trump" card is going to be security.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-38003934
That should push down the Labour share of the vote.
I see Sophy Ridge (SKY) is being given a new Sunday Politics Show. WHY? Do we really need another one, with the same people just dashing from studio to studio?
That is my assessment also - the possibility of a NAFTA deal for the UK and US (partial) disengagement from NATO strengthening the UK's hand vis-a-vis the EU. However, I have no feel yet how well May will do playing that hand, except all this hand-wringing and whinging is for the birds until we have any evidence, and there won't be any of that until the first shots are fired in earnest.
RAIB report :
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/569620/IR012016_161116_Sandilands_Jn.pdf
Edit: looking at the junction map it's easy to see how the driver could miss the bend, as other tracks appear to go straight. Was dark and raining.
As it stands, unless Trump does something totally outrageous which leads to impeachment (not ruling it out), he's here until 2020 and does better in TX, NV, AZ and CA than this time. The loss in Orange County was a classic example of the GOP base turning their nose up at Trump, getting them back on board for 2020 means it will be an easy win.
I think I knew that but it was still a little startling.
Like him or not, Trump is box office.
Ditto Farage.
I commented last night to one of your posts about computer vs humans that I have just started James Case's book, Competition: The Birth of a New Science, and that, in that, he addresses why machines are poorer at multi-player games, like Go, than two-player, zero-sum games.
I have not got fully into his argumentation yet, but you seemed to be implying that computers do well at Go. Is his data out of date (the book is copyright 2007 so was probably written in 2006), or is he still right that the very best human players of Go still beat machines?
Computers were terrible at it previously.
Deep Mind thrashed Lee Sedol, the world champ at it - Now. It doesn't 'solve' the game, but uses evolving algorithms as it plays itself.