Surely there must be a possibility that May could be toppled if it looks as if there will be a disorderly Brexit i.e. no deals in place, US deal very one-sided in favour of the US, recession, relocation of jobs e.g. in car industry to mainland Europe etc etc. Tory MPs might then want to elect someone less focused on "Hard Brexit" and more on getting some sort of associate EU membership?
Economic hardship and its effect on voters might well shift sentiment, no?
FPT - tyson, don't try to rope Roth in on your side.
I think Roth is much too stratospherically brilliant to be roped in on any side.......
That said, the narrative of The Plot Against America describes the terror that politics creates for a Jewish child living in New York...... the parallels to today are evident...... that is me making that link, not Roth.....
He's pretty unequivocal.
'“Trump is ignorant of government, of history, of science, of philosophy, of art, incapable of expressing or recognizing subtlety or nuance, destitute of all decency,” Roth told the magazine in a string of emails. He “wield(s) a vocabulary of seventy-seven words that is better called Jerkish than English.”'
On a Roth quote.. I make an exit.... a man I absolutely adore...thanks. I'm so pleased he called out Trump. I have always been unsure of where Roth's politics lie......
Yep, he's the the greatest. I used to hold Bellow above all others, but for me Roth has overtaken him.
To answer @isam's question, I make the chance of Theresa May foundering before the next election as quite considerable, maybe 1 in 5. She has a very difficult job, a small majority and no particular base in the Conservative party in Parliament.
I make the chance of her successor in these circumstances being someone who has held one of the great offices of state a high one, maybe 3 in 4. Of course, Casino Royale's bets exclude Boris Johnson who is at 20/1. I'd be nervous about leaving him out, even (especially) because his stock is low just now.
I make the chance of the Conservative party supplying the next Prime Minister after the general election in these circumstances as substantial, maybe 3 in 5.
Summing these all up, that makes for a 9% chance. Casino Royale's bets look ok to me.
Sky Bet only allow me to stake pennies, so I'm not bothering. If I were, I'd be backing Philip Hammond only.
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
....and their commander-in-chief is TRUMP! What wouldn't we give to have a Merkel. If anyone still thinks Brexit was a good idea they should be sectioned.
That could be a solution for my declining years. How much do sectioned people have to pay?
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
....and their commander-in-chief is TRUMP! What wouldn't we give to have a Merkel. If anyone still thinks Brexit was a good idea they should be sectioned.
I not only still think it but think that Trump emphasises why we need the ability to forget our own path rather than being tied to others.
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
You do know Big_G that the UK, after a brilliant start in the late 40's and 50's. Britain gave up on on missile and rocket technology and decided, because of the expense, to rely on unreliable allies for it's defence. Both main political parties are to blame for this lamentable state of affairs.
Well I am a professional gambler! Must be doing something right, or maybe I just keep getting lucky!!!
What return you can make as a professional gambler is not a bad indication of your systematic ability to make probabilistic predictions and compare them to offered odds! The difficulty is assessing the predictions on a single event.
Yes I leave that to the rocket scientists. I don't think knowing or not knowing the complicated bit affects my work
I know you take your work seriously! Do you work on behalf of someone else / as part of a syndicate? Always been curious how this works.
I kind of had an idea how to win on a market, made a v simple model (calling it a model is stronging it!) did it on my own a while, got banned from every bookie... went skint! Met a syndicate, did a dragons den style showcase and they developed & fund it
After a General Election a Prime Minister whether incumbent or not has to go to the Sovereign and kiss hands i.e. be appointed /re-appointed. That is the procedure.
When bets such as these are suggested, I'd like to see the authors % chances of each required scenario. Sometimes big prices are just a cover for bad value
So what is the percentage chance that
a) May is forced out before next GE x chance of b) each person winning subsequent leadership election x chance of c) that person then winning/being senior partner in coalition after the next GE
I'm going to ask you a question: it's got nothing to do with Brexit, UKIP or anything political, OK? It's a question about probabilities and how we use them. The question is:
"How do you measure the *accuracy* of a probablistic prediction?"
If somebody says there is a 55% chance that May will win, and May wins...what was the accuracy of that prediction? If somebody says there is a 45% chance that May will win, and May wins...what was the accuracy of that prediction?
There isn't a right answer to this: just tell me how *you* would judge it.
When bets such as these are suggested, I'd like to see the authors % chances of each required scenario. Sometimes big prices are just a cover for bad value
So what is the percentage chance that
a) May is forced out before next GE x chance of b) each person winning subsequent leadership election x chance of c) that person then winning/being senior partner in coalition after the next GE
I'm going to ask you a question: it's got nothing to do with Brexit, UKIP or anything political, OK? It's a question about probabilities and how we use them. The question is:
"How do you measure the *accuracy* of a probablistic prediction?"
If somebody says there is a 55% chance that May will win, and May wins...what was the accuracy of that prediction? If somebody says there is a 45% chance that May will win, and May wins...what was the accuracy of that prediction?
There isn't a right answer to this: just tell me how *you* would judge it.
Are you ever active on the CrossValidated Stack Exchange? It's a topic of discussion there occasionally.
If you aren't, you should join in - seems to be your kind of place!
(For one thing most people there seem to speak in R, which suits me - and if memory serves, R is your weapon of choice too. All the cool kids these days seem to be using Python notebooks. 'Cept for the too-cool-for-school ones using Julia. That's one site where I don't feel like a fossil.)
Well I am a professional gambler! Must be doing something right, or maybe I just keep getting lucky!!!
What return you can make as a professional gambler is not a bad indication of your systematic ability to make probabilistic predictions and compare them to offered odds! The difficulty is assessing the predictions on a single event.
Yes I leave that to the rocket scientists. I don't think knowing or not knowing the complicated bit affects my work
I know you take your work seriously! Do you work on behalf of someone else / as part of a syndicate? Always been curious how this works.
I kind of had an idea how to win on a market, made a v simple model (calling it a model is stronging it!) did it on my own a while, got banned from every bookie... went skint! Met a syndicate, did a dragons den style showcase and they developed & fund it
To answer @isam's question, I make the chance of Theresa May foundering before the next election as quite considerable, maybe 1 in 5. She has a very difficult job, a small majority and no particular base in the Conservative party in Parliament.
I make the chance of her successor in these circumstances being someone who has held one of the great offices of state a high one, maybe 3 in 4. Of course, Casino Royale's bets exclude Boris Johnson who is at 20/1. I'd be nervous about leaving him out, even (especially) because his stock is low just now.
I make the chance of the Conservative party supplying the next Prime Minister after the general election in these circumstances as substantial, maybe 3 in 5.
Summing these all up, that makes for a 9% chance. Casino Royale's bets look ok to me.
Sky Bet only allow me to stake pennies, so I'm not bothering. If I were, I'd be backing Philip Hammond only.
So May going but Tories still winning is
0.2*0.6... a 12% chance
I make it that 100/1 Hammond is effectively 11/1 he is next Con leader and 200/1 Osborne and Rudd is 20/1 next Tory leader on that basis.
12/1 14/1 and 25/1 are available, so the Osborne one is ok, you'd be better off just taking the 12s and 25s about the others (I think)
After a General Election a Prime Minister whether incumbent or not has to go to the Sovereign and kiss hands i.e. be appointed /re-appointed. That is the procedure.
Sure about that? Did Blair in 2001? Thatcher in 1983? Wilson in 1974? Macmillan in 1959? Genuine questions.
If May falls before the next election the most likely reason would be the Tories felt her Brexit deal was not hard enough, in which case a hard Brexiteer former Cabinet Minister like Owen Paterson would be a good bet. Most likely though she survives and wins the next election and hands over to Phillip Hammond halfway through the next Parliament
Neither Paterson nor Fox are ever likely to be PM. Tory Mps will be the ones choosing, not Grassroots Out
Paterson is now probably the prime hard Brexit candidate after Leadsom and Gove and Fox's failure last time and given Tory MPs put Leadsom in the final two with less experience than Paterson there is no reason Paterson could not also get to the final two sent to members. However I don't think May is in much danger unless she is seen as agreeing too soft a Brexit for her backbenchers taste
Surely for every Bill Cash or John Redwood there's a Dominic Grieve or Ken Clarke? If 70% of Parliament supports Remain, that includes a lot of Tories.
Not really. Large numbers of Tories supported Remain for reasons other than belief in the EU. The number who are genuinelu in favour of continued British membership are now tiny.
I suspect the vast majority of Tory MPs are boringly middle of the road like the majority of the nation. Not extreme one way or another, could be tempted one way or another - and now accept the result.
Hence my use of the 'now'. There are a few diehard lunatics but they have no real support in the party. When even someone as pro EU as Damien Green is behind Brexit it shows how few of the Euro fanatics there are left
Most of the true believers in the EU, eg John Stevens, Edward Macmillan Scott, Brendan Donnelly, Bill Newton Dunn, Robert and Caroline Jackson, Quentin Davies, Derek Prag, have long since departed. At most, perhaps 10% of Tory voters are annoyed about Brexit. That proportion will be far higher in some seats, like Battersea or St. Albans, but far lower in places like Kent or Essex.
If May falls before the next election the most likely reason would be the Tories felt her Brexit deal was not hard enough, in which case a hard Brexiteer former Cabinet Minister like Owen Paterson would be a good bet. Most likely though she survives and wins the next election and hands over to Phillip Hammond halfway through the next Parliament
Neither Paterson nor Fox are ever likely to be PM. Tory Mps will be the ones choosing, not Grassroots Out
Paterson is now probably the prime hard Brexit candidate after Leadsom and Gove and Fox's failure last time and given Tory MPs put Leadsom in the final two with less experience than Paterson there is no reason Paterson could not also get to the final two sent to members. However I don't think May is in much danger unless she is seen as agreeing too soft a Brexit for her backbenchers taste
Surely for every Bill Cash or John Redwood there's a Dominic Grieve or Ken Clarke? If 70% of Parliament supports Remain, that includes a lot of Tories.
Not really. Large numbers of Tories supported Remain for reasons other than belief in the EU. The number who are genuinelu in favour of continued British membership are now tiny.
I suspect the vast majority of Tory MPs are boringly middle of the road like the majority of the nation. Not extreme one way or another, could be tempted one way or another - and now accept the result.
Hence my use of the 'now'. There are a few diehard lunatics but they have no real support in the party. When even someone as pro EU as Damien Green is behind Brexit it shows how few of the Euro fanatics there are left
Most of the true believers in the EU, eg John Stevens, Edward Macmillan Scott, Brendan Donnelly, Bill Newton Dunn, Robert and Caroline Jackson, Quentin Davies, Derek Prag, have long since departed. At most, perhaps 10% of Tory voters are annoyed about Brexit. That proportion will be far higher in some seats, like Battersea or St. Albans, but far lower in places like Kent or Essex.
Wait until the economic and constitutional damage of Brexit becomes apparent. The middle-of-road Tory voters won't be so forgiving.
The next thread from me will be after tomorrow's Supreme Court ruling due at 0930 GMT
The assumption is that the claim will be upheld. A big question is whether the court will impose some complicating conditions or will it be simple.
The Betfair market might give an early indication of the decision. There will be quite a few people by now who know the outcome - the judgment will presumably by now have been given in draft to the parties, under an embargo till tomorrow morning.
Ironically if the court decision goes against the government as is likely that will boost Tory chances in Copeland
Shadsy's double on the byelection is better value on Tories winning both at 20/1. In Copeland they are the challenger, in Stoke less obviously so. I reckon that LDs and UKIP will both chip away at different parts of the Labour vote, while the Tories are likely to pick up much of the kipper and independent vote. 20/1.
Though obviously the 23/1 on Betfair exchange is better value!
Personally I think the Tories take Copeland but Labour hold Stoke
I think Labour hold both. Though post Brexit anything can happen. Techtonic plates are shifting.
Laying Nuttall in Stoke is my main bet. It won't be him.
On present polling Stoke will be a Labour hold on a reduced majority, Copeland neck and neck between the Tories and Labour
I would rather lose Stoke to UKIP than Copeland to the Tories. Nuttall would be sitting on our side of the chamber, making mischief for the government, and we would definitely have to develop a coherent Red Brexit message after such a defeat.
On today's ICM poll Labour would hold Stoke on 35% with the Tories on 28% and UKIP on 23%. The Tories would gain Copeland on 40% to 38% for Labour
If May falls before the next election the most likely reason would be the Tories felt her Brexit deal was not hard enough, in which case a hard Brexiteer former Cabinet Minister like Owen Paterson would be a good bet. Most likely though she survives and wins the next election and hands over to Phillip Hammond halfway through the next Parliament
Neither Paterson nor Fox are ever likely to be PM. Tory Mps will be the ones choosing, not Grassroots Out
Paterson is now probably the prime hard Brexit candidate after Leadsom and Gove and Fox's failure last time and given Tory MPs put Leadsom in the final two with less experience than Paterson there is no reason Paterson could not also get to the final two sent to members. However I don't think May is in much danger unless she is seen as agreeing too soft a Brexit for her backbenchers taste
Surely for every Bill Cash or John Redwood there's a Dominic Grieve or Ken Clarke? If 70% of Parliament supports Remain, that includes a lot of Tories.
Not really. Large numbers of Tories supported Remain for reasons other than belief in the EU. The number who are genuinelu in favour of continued British membership are now tiny.
I suspect the vast majority of Tory MPs are boringly middle of the road like the majority of the nation. Not extreme one way or another, could be tempted one way or another - and now accept the result.
Hence my use of the 'now'. There are a few diehard lunatics but they have no real support in the party. When even someone as pro EU as Damien Green is behind Brexit it shows how few of the Euro fanatics there are left
Most of the true believers in the EU, eg John Stevens, Edward Macmillan Scott, Brendan Donnelly, Bill Newton Dunn, Robert and Caroline Jackson, Quentin Davies, Derek Prag, have long since departed. At most, perhaps 10% of Tory voters are annoyed about Brexit. That proportion will be far higher in some seats, like Battersea or St. Albans, but far lower in places like Kent or Essex.
Wait until the economic and constitutional damage of Brexit becomes apparent. The middle-of-road Tory voters won't be so forgiving.
Well I am a professional gambler! Must be doing something right, or maybe I just keep getting lucky!!!
What return you can make as a professional gambler is not a bad indication of your systematic ability to make probabilistic predictions and compare them to offered odds! The difficulty is assessing the predictions on a single event.
Yes I leave that to the rocket scientists. I don't think knowing or not knowing the complicated bit affects my work
I know you take your work seriously! Do you work on behalf of someone else / as part of a syndicate? Always been curious how this works.
I kind of had an idea how to win on a market, made a v simple model (calling it a model is stronging it!) did it on my own a while, got banned from every bookie... went skint! Met a syndicate, did a dragons den style showcase and they developed & fund it
Always glad to see an Essex boy made good.
Appreciate your openness, thanks.
Haven't made it that good yet!! Thanks, no problem
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
Oh yes, the "independent" deterrent.
The UK has x number of her own missiles retained in the US and selects from that stock. It is completely independent in command and control
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
....and their commander-in-chief is TRUMP! What wouldn't we give to have a Merkel. If anyone still thinks Brexit was a good idea they should be sectioned.
Why would we want to be controlled by Germany and Merkel and no, insulting those who disagree is always the way of the left
So how's that work then? I thought bookies lost money when favourites win, and clean up when outsiders win? Surely can't all be down to PBers' quick action on election night.
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
....and their commander-in-chief is TRUMP! What wouldn't we give to have a Merkel. If anyone still thinks Brexit was a good idea they should be sectioned.
Why would we want to be controlled by Germany and Merkel and no, insulting those who disagree is always the way of the left
Irony alert. If only the left could be more like the right. More like Trump.
If you aren't, you should join in - [CrossValidated Stack Exchange] seems to be your kind of place!
It is, thank you!
One of the moderators on that site is a British guy who happens to be rather knowledgeable about assessing probabilistic predictions.
If you can browse CV for a bit and can pose a new, interesting, relatively brief/self-contained, non-trivial, not primarily opinion-based and (they take this seriously, which is why you need to read what's already been discussed there first) non-duplicate question you are likely to get an interesting, well-informed reply or two.
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
....and their commander-in-chief is TRUMP! What wouldn't we give to have a Merkel. If anyone still thinks Brexit was a good idea they should be sectioned.
Why would we want to be controlled by Germany and Merkel and no, insulting those who disagree is always the way of the left
Irony alert. If only the left could be more like the right. More like Trump.
For clarification I am not a supporter of Trump but neither do I support Merkel
" It's funny all the same...Theresa was made to look like a complete jackass, out of her depth, and without any media skills..... She shows all the political dexterity of a lumbering piece of clay Looking forward to this week's photo shoot with Donald and Melania"
It looked to me like Corbyn's first lucky break. He's been banging on about the danger of nuclear weapons and the first time the British public sees one of ours in action it loops the loop and would have left the US without Florida. With a Sid and Doris President and TM up his backside I'm starting to wonder if Corbyn might be the safest option.
You do know that a missile default does not set off an explosion. There is a separate command structure to the missile to do this. Furthermore the missile is US, it is the warhead that is UK.
Any problem with the missile will have been resolved by the US
....and their commander-in-chief is TRUMP! What wouldn't we give to have a Merkel. If anyone still thinks Brexit was a good idea they should be sectioned.
Why would we want to be controlled by Germany and Merkel and no, insulting those who disagree is always the way of the left
Because the EU has the largest GDP in the World marginally ahead of the US and miles ahead of China in third place. The US who seems to be our only alternative has just been usurped by a madman who today showed he's also a protectionist.
Why would any sane person give up our comfortable position in the largest trading block in the world for the absolute certainty of being-AT BEST- used and abused by the the second largest?
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
It's just the pre-amble, which is no more than and no less than a political statement. If Ireland wanted to make life difficult for the UK it could, but that is not the public feeling nor do I get the sense that the Dail takes that position.
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
Would the Good Friday Agreement be fatally undermined if that first preamble now read:
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours"?
In short doesn't it depend on whether that phrase "as partners in the European Union" is simply a statement of fact (and its removal is simply reflecting the changed facts) or whether it is a condition of the agreement that Britain should be a member of the EU? I have never heard anyone say the latter BTW.
1. Invest up to £3,600 gross per child per tax year – the taxman automatically pays 20% tax relief (up to £720) so this will only cost £2,880.
2. Investments in a pension are free from UK income and capital gains taxes. Remember tax rules can change and benefits depend on personal circumstances.
3. Gifts to a child’s pension are often covered by one of the inheritance tax exemptions and so could fall outside your estate for inheritance tax purposes.
Giving tax relief to toddlers with wealthy parents while we slash school budgets?
So how's that work then? I thought bookies lost money when favourites win, and clean up when outsiders win? Surely can't all be down to PBers' quick action on election night.
Is it because Paddy Power settled bets on Clinton a few days before the election?
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
It's just the pre-amble, which is no more than and no less than a political statement. If Ireland wanted to make life difficult for the UK it could, but that is not the public feeling nor do I get the sense that the Dail takes that position.
The agreement itself also refers to how EU matters relate to the north/south council:
17. The Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings.
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Yeah, that would end well.
The question is about which precise domestic and foreign agreements are impliedly abrogated by the process of leaving the EU. The honour of Britain and its respect for the rule of law are at stake.
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Yeah, that would end well.
The question is about which precise domestic and foreign agreements are impliedly abrogated by the process of leaving the EU. The honour of Britain and its respect for the rule of law are at stake.
Why don't you just wait for the Supreme Court - its only 9.30 tomorrow morning you know
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Yeah, that would end well.
Trump to the left....Brexit to the right......stuck in the middle with EU.
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
If that is what the North wants, let's give them full union with RoI. Then they won't have to leave the EU, nor suffer an imposed border.
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Yeah, that would end well.
The question is about which precise domestic and foreign agreements are impliedly abrogated by the process of leaving the EU. The honour of Britain and its respect for the rule of law are at stake.
Times implies that US navigation system was at fault.
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
Times implies that US navigation system was at fault.
In some respects it was a very successful test. It is reassuring to know that if the missile can't understand the woman on the satnav and takes a wrong turn, there are systems on board to cause self destruction without a nuclear detonation in the wrong place.
Times implies that US navigation system was at fault.
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
No - Obama demands the cover up as it was the US navigation system that failed and he was worried by his stock of missiles. Assume this will now pass over to the US defence ministry
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
@DavidMills73: If a cartoonist hasn't drawn hard Brexit as a missile taking a wrong turn and landing on the Tories, then what is this country even for?
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Yeah, that would end well.
The question is about which precise domestic and foreign agreements are impliedly abrogated by the process of leaving the EU. The honour of Britain and its respect for the rule of law are at stake.
If we dig deeply enough, we might find that the honour of Britain and its respect for the law decreed that we could never join the EU, thereby abandoning the Commonwealth. So the last 40-odd years have been a legal fiction, a mirage.
Times implies that US navigation system was at fault.
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
No - Obama demands the cover up as it was the US navigation system that failed and he was worried by his stock of missiles. Assume this will now pass over to the US defence ministry
Now that Beloved Barry has been implicated I'm guessing the media will be quietly dropping this story in 5...4...3...
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
@DavidMills73: If a cartoonist hasn't drawn hard Brexit as a missile taking a wrong turn and landing on the Tories, then what is this country even for?
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
@DavidMills73: If a cartoonist hasn't drawn hard Brexit as a missile taking a wrong turn and landing on the Tories, then what is this country even for?
A fuck up under Cameron and Obama that their supporters are furiously trying to spin as nothing to do with them/blame their successors?
"Stop me oh oh oh stop me, stop me if you think that you've heard this one before"
A bit of trivia that may be relevant in months to come: The new chair of the German equivalent of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee is a Scot, David McAllister.
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
@DavidMills73: If a cartoonist hasn't drawn hard Brexit as a missile taking a wrong turn and landing on the Tories, then what is this country even for?
A fuck up under Cameron and Obama that their supporters are furiously trying to spin as nothing to do with them/blame their successors?
"Stop me oh oh oh stop me, stop me if you think that you've heard this one before"
I realise that weapons systems are a big deal, but how does a test going wrong turn into a f up for governments?
If harm had been done, then yes; but the system failed safe as designed. Someone somewhere is probably hanging their head in shame at a mistake, but why at government level?
Well I am a professional gambler! Must be doing something right, or maybe I just keep getting lucky!!!
What return you can make as a professional gambler is not a bad indication of your systematic ability to make probabilistic predictions and compare them to offered odds! The difficulty is assessing the predictions on a single event.
Yes I leave that to the rocket scientists. I don't think knowing or not knowing the complicated bit affects my work
I know you take your work seriously! Do you work on behalf of someone else / as part of a syndicate? Always been curious how this works.
I kind of had an idea how to win on a market, made a v simple model (calling it a model is stronging it!) did it on my own a while, got banned from every bookie... went skint! Met a syndicate, did a dragons den style showcase and they developed & fund it
A bit of trivia that may be relevant in months to come: The new chair of the German equivalent of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee is a Scot, David McAllister.
Surely that should read 'European called David McAllister'
Was it a real missile? or was it a metaphor for Brexit Britain?
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
@DavidMills73: If a cartoonist hasn't drawn hard Brexit as a missile taking a wrong turn and landing on the Tories, then what is this country even for?
A fuck up under Cameron and Obama that their supporters are furiously trying to spin as nothing to do with them/blame their successors?
"Stop me oh oh oh stop me, stop me if you think that you've heard this one before"
I realise that weapons systems are a big deal, but how does a test going wrong turn into a f up for governments?
If harm had been done, then yes; but the system failed safe as designed. Someone somewhere is probably hanging their head in shame at a mistake, but why at government level?
No idea, I'm not blaming them.. but people seem to be wanting to blame May... I'm sure it's for not being 100% honest like Dave was in the commons.
*Cough*1.7bn *splutter* I'm staying on after EU ref
It's interesting to reread this piece written in 2013 before Cameron started his renegotiation in the light of what's happened subsequently.
But Germany is showing growing irritation with Britain. Georg Boomgaarden, the German ambassador to London, dismissed the Eurosceptics' belief that Britain faces a choice between "pick-and-choose or out".
The ambassador told the Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland: "This is really a choice between out and out … If you pick and choose you blow up the single market."
Would that give Theresa the excuse to have a general election?
If the devolved assemblies have the right to block Brexit, then a Westminster majority of 400 wouldn't help Theresa surely? Legally she would still need their approval. N.Ireland would likely be more pragmatic about it if concerns about the border were met, and Wales voted to leave so their politicians will be wary of blocking, but the Scottish parliament and the SNP would delight in blocking "Tory Brexit", unless their deliberately unrealistic demands are met.
Would that give Theresa the excuse to have a general election?
If the devolved assemblies have the right to block Brexit, then a Westminster majority of 400 wouldn't help Theresa surely? Legally she would still need their approval. N.Ireland would likely be more pragmatic about it if concerns about the border were met, and Wales voted to leave so their politicians will be wary of blocking, but the Scottish parliament and the SNP would delight in blocking "Tory Brexit", unless their deliberately unrealistic demands are met.
It's interesting to reread this piece written in 2013 before Cameron started his renegotiation in the light of what's happened subsequently.
But Germany is showing growing irritation with Britain. Georg Boomgaarden, the German ambassador to London, dismissed the Eurosceptics' belief that Britain faces a choice between "pick-and-choose or out".
The ambassador told the Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland: "This is really a choice between out and out … If you pick and choose you blow up the single market."
I think the way we are used to hearing that is Brexit means Brexit.
For a while it has become between obvious and inevitable that leaving is not an a la carte choice. Hence the realism of selecting one option (ditching FOM) other for the other (singe market). You can argue it is the wrong selection, but it is one of only one and a small bit that are available.
If Macron, the centrist, former banker, EU fanatic and Hollande's former "vice-president" (that's four vote-losing attributes), overtakes Fillon - Sarkozy's former prime minister who promises to sack half a million workers in the public sector (how did increasing unemployment fare in the focus groups?) - there will be big smiles in the leadership of Le Pen's National Front. "Europe" is the issue she wants to fight the election on. Or at least it functions as the polite side of the immigration issue. Does that remind us of something?
The latest poll by Ipsos, fieldwork conducted on Friday, Bayrou not on the list, gives Mélenchon and Macron 15% and 18% to Valls's 9%, and 20% and 13% to Hamon's 8%.
The PCF-backed candidate Mélenchon is handing Valls's and Hamon's arses to them on a plate. As far as I know, no mainstream newspaper is reporting it like that.
Pre-first round TV debates may be forced to happen even if "establishment" candidates Macron and Fillon and the PS candidate don't want them. At which point Macron in a polarisation contest is toast.
It's interesting to reread this piece written in 2013 before Cameron started his renegotiation in the light of what's happened subsequently.
But Germany is showing growing irritation with Britain. Georg Boomgaarden, the German ambassador to London, dismissed the Eurosceptics' belief that Britain faces a choice between "pick-and-choose or out".
The ambassador told the Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland: "This is really a choice between out and out … If you pick and choose you blow up the single market."
Pre-first round TV debates may be forced to happen even if "establishment" candidates Macron and Fillon and the PS candidate don't want them. At which point Macron in a polarisation contest is toast.
I detect a cooling about the chances of Dupont-Aignan.
If the devolved assemblies have the right to block Brexit, then a Westminster majority of 400 wouldn't help Theresa surely? Legally she would still need their approval. N.Ireland would likely be more pragmatic about it if concerns about the border were met,
That's a huge "if", because it requires EU27 agreeing to enormous special pleading by one of its members, the Republic of Ireland.
and Wales voted to leave so their politicians will be wary of blocking, but the Scottish parliament and the SNP would delight in blocking "Tory Brexit", unless their deliberately unrealistic demands are met.
This is true. Got to wonder what Britgov's move would be against that. Throw them a referendum and hope that voters in Scotland will appreciate that a huge increase in immigration plus customs posts on the EU external border on the A74(M) and by the bridge in Coldstream aren't a desirable combination?
Pre-first round TV debates may be forced to happen even if "establishment" candidates Macron and Fillon and the PS candidate don't want them. At which point Macron in a polarisation contest is toast.
I detect a cooling about the chances of Dupont-Aignan.
Not necessarily If there's a fight for TV debates he will be involved.
I think it could be Boris. I think he's still pretty popular in the country at large, if the tories start looking like losing, he is probably their best bet electorally. Plus PMs tend to correct the flaws of the previous PM (while bringing new ones to be corrected down the line):
Major was mild-mannered compared to domineering Thatcher Charming Blair vs dull Major Serious Brown vs slimy Blair That Nice Mr. Cameron vs Bad-tempered Brown Get-on-with-the-job May vs chillaxing Cameron Charismatic Boris vs boring May.
The tories will want someone with oodles of charisma, definitely not dull-as-dishwater Hammond. It could be someone other than Boris - but he seems the best placed.
If Macron, the centrist, former banker, EU fanatic and Hollande's former "vice-president" (that's four vote-losing attributes), overtakes Fillon - Sarkozy's former prime minister who promises to sack half a million workers in the public sector (how did increasing unemployment fare in the focus groups?) - there will be big smiles in the leadership of Le Pen's National Front. "Europe" is the issue she wants to fight the election on. Or at least it functions as the polite side of the immigration issue. Does that remind us of something?
The latest poll by Ipsos, fieldwork conducted on Friday, Bayrou not on the list, gives Mélenchon and Macron 15% and 18% to Valls's 9%, and 20% and 13% to Hamon's 8%.
The PCF-backed candidate Mélenchon is handing Valls's and Hamon's arses to them on a plate. As far as I know, no mainstream newspaper is reporting it like that.
Pre-first round TV debates may be forced to happen even if "establishment" candidates Macron and Fillon and the PS candidate don't want them. At which point Macron in a polarisation contest is toast.
Interesting:
I'm
-562.08 Le Pen +141.02 Macron +417.5 Melenchon +147.26 Fillon -19.5 Other
Melenchon is quite cheap right now. Glad to have gotten rid of my implied red in the market with respect to my initial Juppe Bet.
The next thread from me will be after tomorrow's Supreme Court ruling due at 0930 GMT
The assumption is that the claim will be upheld. A big question is whether the court will impose some complicating conditions or will it be simple.
The Betfair market might give an early indication of the decision. There will be quite a few people by now who know the outcome - the judgment will presumably by now have been given in draft to the parties, under an embargo till tomorrow morning.
I wouldn't be too sure. I read yesterday (can't find the source) that the parties involved get to see it at 9.00, the PM at 9.15 and the announcement is at 9.30......
I think it could be Boris. I think he's still pretty popular in the country at large, if the tories start looking like losing, he is probably their best bet electorally. Plus PMs tend to correct the flaws of the previous PM (while bringing new ones to be corrected down the line):
Major was mild-mannered compared to domineering Thatcher Charming Blair vs dull Major Serious Brown vs slimy Blair That Nice Mr. Cameron vs Bad-tempered Brown Get-on-with-the-job May vs chillaxing Cameron Charismatic Boris vs boring May.
The tories will want someone with oodles of charisma, definitely not dull-as-dishwater Hammond. It could be someone other than Boris - but he seems the best placed.
After well over a decade in power when May finally goes the Tories will want a safe pair of hands, Boris' chance has probably gone now though he might have a chance as opposition leader if Labour ever get their act together and return to ower
Would that give Theresa the excuse to have a general election?
If the devolved assemblies have the right to block Brexit, then a Westminster majority of 400 wouldn't help Theresa surely? Legally she would still need their approval. N.Ireland would likely be more pragmatic about it if concerns about the border were met, and Wales voted to leave so their politicians will be wary of blocking, but the Scottish parliament and the SNP would delight in blocking "Tory Brexit", unless their deliberately unrealistic demands are met.
With a majority of 400 she could always abolish the devolved assemblies if they got in the way.
Comments
I used to hold Bellow above all others, but for me Roth has overtaken him.
Appreciate your openness, thanks.
If you aren't, you should join in - seems to be your kind of place!
(For one thing most people there seem to speak in R, which suits me - and if memory serves, R is your weapon of choice too. All the cool kids these days seem to be using Python notebooks. 'Cept for the too-cool-for-school ones using Julia. That's one site where I don't feel like a fossil.)
0.2*0.6... a 12% chance
I make it that 100/1 Hammond is effectively 11/1 he is next Con leader and 200/1 Osborne and Rudd is 20/1 next Tory leader on that basis.
12/1 14/1 and 25/1 are available, so the Osborne one is ok, you'd be better off just taking the 12s and 25s about the others (I think)
If the Supreme Court rule that foreign affairs are now to be decided by the regions, that will be a very interesting state of affairs.
In my view Brexit shouldn't even be attempted without drawing up a brand new constitution.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38715747
So how's that work then? I thought bookies lost money when favourites win, and clean up when outsiders win? Surely can't all be down to PBers' quick action on election night.
If you can browse CV for a bit and can pose a new, interesting, relatively brief/self-contained, non-trivial, not primarily opinion-based and (they take this seriously, which is why you need to read what's already been discussed there first) non-duplicate question you are likely to get an interesting, well-informed reply or two.
https://twitter.com/marv_vien/status/823621167621619713
Guardian printed on News International Presses. Cue for spilt coffees at breakfast tomorrow.
Why would any sane person give up our comfortable position in the largest trading block in the world for the absolute certainty of being-AT BEST- used and abused by the the second largest?
The British and Irish Governments:
Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union;
Have agreed as follows:
It's hard to argue that leaving the EU doesn't undermine the foundation of this agreement. Ireland has been quite passive about Brexit so far and there are now more calls for them to be more assertive in insisting the UK sticks to its obligations.
http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/others/irish-cannot-trust-british-on-brexit-good-friday-agreement-not-negotiable
Let it be plain that the Dublin government is openly determined to protect its most important diplomatic achievement since it won full sovereignty between 1922 and 1949. It must publicly tell its fellow EU member-states that it has a principled bottom-line, for which there are no acceptable pay-offs.
20/1 is effectively 6/4
FBI Is Probing Sundance Cyberattack That Forced Box Office To Close
http://m.slashdot.org/story/321599
So Ireland would now get to tell the British PM whether she's allowed to make or cancel foreign agreements?
Yeah, that would end well.
"Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours"?
In short doesn't it depend on whether that phrase "as partners in the European Union" is simply a statement of fact (and its removal is simply reflecting the changed facts) or whether it is a condition of the agreement that Britain should be a member of the EU? I have never heard anyone say the latter BTW.
http://www.hl.co.uk/pensions/vantage-junior-sipp
1. Invest up to £3,600 gross per child per tax year – the taxman automatically pays 20% tax relief (up to £720) so this will only cost £2,880.
2. Investments in a pension are free from UK income and capital gains taxes. Remember tax rules can change and benefits depend on personal circumstances.
3. Gifts to a child’s pension are often covered by one of the inheritance tax exemptions and so could fall outside your estate for inheritance tax purposes.
Giving tax relief to toddlers with wealthy parents while we slash school budgets?
17. The Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/23/jeremy-corbyn-launch-bid-send-theresa-mays-final-brexit-deal/
The Irish are riding the wrong horse.
Like immigration, no-one is going to have a clue what Labour's position is. Not even the leader....
"Ricky explains". Jesus Christ.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/38689696
Clear that she doesn't have a clue, that is.
All good news for the Nutty Boy in Stoke.
Perhaps just temper the rhetoric a little bit.
Supposedly powerful weapon of independence, veers off course to Trumpland and has to be ditched in the sea. Government tries to cover up all the egg on its face.
https://twitter.com/DabAggin/status/823335043900833792
@alstewitn: Post-@libertyglobal take-over of #F1, Ross Brawn to be MD, motor-sports. Best possible start.
"Stop me oh oh oh stop me, stop me if you think that you've heard this one before"
Wonders will never cease.
If harm had been done, then yes; but the system failed safe as designed. Someone somewhere is probably hanging their head in shame at a mistake, but why at government level?
*Cough*1.7bn *splutter* I'm staying on after EU ref
But Germany is showing growing irritation with Britain. Georg Boomgaarden, the German ambassador to London, dismissed the Eurosceptics' belief that Britain faces a choice between "pick-and-choose or out".
The ambassador told the Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland: "This is really a choice between out and out … If you pick and choose you blow up the single market."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jan/11/cameron-merkel-eu-treaty
For a while it has become between obvious and inevitable that leaving is not an a la carte choice. Hence the realism of selecting one option (ditching FOM) other for the other (singe market). You can argue it is the wrong selection, but it is one of only one and a small bit that are available.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELD2AwFN9Nc&sns=tw via @youtube
The latest poll by Ipsos, fieldwork conducted on Friday, Bayrou not on the list, gives Mélenchon and Macron 15% and 18% to Valls's 9%, and 20% and 13% to Hamon's 8%.
The PCF-backed candidate Mélenchon is handing Valls's and Hamon's arses to them on a plate. As far as I know, no mainstream newspaper is reporting it like that.
Pre-first round TV debates may be forced to happen even if "establishment" candidates Macron and Fillon and the PS candidate don't want them. At which point Macron in a polarisation contest is toast.
Major was mild-mannered compared to domineering Thatcher
Charming Blair vs dull Major
Serious Brown vs slimy Blair
That Nice Mr. Cameron vs Bad-tempered Brown
Get-on-with-the-job May vs chillaxing Cameron
Charismatic Boris vs boring May.
The tories will want someone with oodles of charisma, definitely not dull-as-dishwater Hammond. It could be someone other than Boris - but he seems the best placed.
I'm
-562.08 Le Pen
+141.02 Macron
+417.5 Melenchon
+147.26 Fillon
-19.5 Other
Melenchon is quite cheap right now. Glad to have gotten rid of my implied red in the market with respect to my initial Juppe Bet.