Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
Hacksaw Ridge is a stunningly good war film - or film, period. If La La Land weren't being lauded like Ben Hur, it might stand a chance. And I far preferred Andrew Garfield's performance in it to that of the much-touted Casey Affleck in Manchester by the Sea.
Amy Adams getting overlooked for Best Actress in Arrival was a shock. I suppose somebody had to lose out so Meryl could get her 20th....
Very gratified though to see Hidden Figures getting a Best Picture Nom. Entirely deserved. The film I most ENJOYED out of the whole awards crop."
MM
I'm just catchin less so.
Agree on "Jackie" - her performance WAS the film. Must be a strong favourite unless the Academy go completely bonkers over La La Land. Which has to be a possibility, it being set in LA and all...
Hacksaw RIdge has a very strong potential appeal to the liberal left - a true story of a conscientious objector, the hell he has to go through in training and his extraordinary war - being capped off by receiving the highest gallantry medal in the US. The sort of story that might well appeal to those who really dislike Trump - and I'm thinking that is maybe 85% of Academy voters. (Set against that, I guess many would not want to see Mel Gibson to prosper as director - so the value there is on Andrew Garfield who is well gong-worthy). BTW make sure you stay to the very end of Hacksaw Ridge (which is a bit of an endurance, because arguably its only fault is it feels a good 15 minutes too long).
I read up on Hacksaw Ridge after I saw the film - contrary to most Hollywood fare they actually toned down rather than exaggerated the heroics....which makes the true life story even more remarkable.
One of the the quirks of British military history that I like is that one of our double VC winners achieved both without killing anyone.
Have Sinn Fein said anything more about whether they'll take their seats to vote against A50?
Do you now accept Brexit is very likely to happen?
I think this might make a good poll for PB-ers: the chances of Brexit being stopped
To my mind, the last serious chance of thwarting Brexit has now gone.
1. Legally it's over, the best hope was the Supreme Court giving Sturgeon a veto. didn't happen. 2. Politically it's over, Remoaners needed Labour to unite behind stalling Brexit, but they didn't. A50 will be triggered 3. Economically it's over: growth in 4Q16 was 0.6%, best in the G7. This momentum will carry forward. There's not gonna be some huge recession changing people's minds. And the polls show the voters are becoming MORE Brexity, anyway. Plus Confirmation Bias.
And with that, it's done. The last forlorn hope for Remainers is a black swan. A war. Comet strike. Spanish flu. Trump nuking us. I dunno. I think it's over. And we're out.
It's a rage against the dying of the light.
Entirely understandably, considering the moral and intellectual darkness that is engulfing us.
In your opinion.
I see Brexit as a fantastic project for national democratic renewal.
Brexit will not renew anything positive, being born of xenophobia. It cannot shrug off the circumstances of its birth.
It (and it really does) genuinely upset me that you think that but border control was always going to feature in any Leave campaign, and rightly so.
Leave won from a coalition of sovereignists, including many centrists, graduates and post graduates, as well as those concerned on immigration.
Any either or strategy would have topped out at 35% for Leave.
Leave got over the line with "Turkey (population 76 million) is joining the EU" and the Breaking Point poster. Mealymouthed nonsense about a coalition is just that: mealymouthed nonsense.
Having won by pandering to xenophobia, Brexit is damned from the start by the way in which it was won.
The Breaking Point poster was Farage and I disowned it at the time. As did vote Leave.
I disagree it's damned forevermore. Even if i recognise you may always hold it so.
I was more upset about Jo Cox and the election of Trump - both unpleasant incidents (and the former a tragedy) that have greatly soured the milk.
@SkyNewsBreak: White House says President Trump will hold a news conference with Theresa May tomorrow
Oh God. Poor Theresa. Lie back and think of England dear heart.
Well if you think Theresa's gonna have it bad look at HMQ.
She's had 65 years of having to "entertain" the mad, bad and clearly insane (and no doubt will be "Banqueting" with The Donald before you can say "Donald Where's Your Trousers"...)
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
He is the least "Remainy" of the four choices though... Maybe its his silly tweets. I thought it 50/50 at the start of the week, so should really be backing Lab now. Don't really have a big position on it, do you?
No, I've kept out of this one. I'm on Labour in Copeland.
If I had to choose, I'd also back Labour in Stoke (I think they should be mild favourites), but it's a hard one to read.
I think Labour will hold Stoke.
Copeland, less sure. What makes me hesitate is that there is a future for a Tory MP for Copeland (as he or she will contest and most likely claim the enlarged Barrow seat at the next General Election).
Unless Woodcock goes, there is no future for a Labour MP for Copeland.
So, I just wonder if this makes the Tory candidate and team more motivated in what will be a close by-election.
See John Woodcock and Isabel Hardman are reputed to be an item. I hope it works out for her following her recent depression
The Breaking Point poster was Farage and I disowned it at the time. As did vote Leave.
I disagree it's damned forevermore. Even if i recognise you may always hold it so.
I was more upset about Jo Cox and the election of Trump - both unpleasant incidents (and the former a tragedy) that have greatly soured the milk.
This week on pb we have had posters - who previously had been growling about how Britain was full - effusing about the possibility of freedom of movement with the former white colonies. A succession of posters have found themselves unable to condemn the death threats against Gina Miller without also spending far more time explaining why they find her to be an appalling woman.
This is part of the early fruit of the labours of last summer. It will get worse.
She's had 65 years of having to entertain the mad, bad and clearly insane (and no doubt the Banqueting with The Donald before you can say "Donald Where's Your Trousers"...)
Trump reportedly wants a grander visit than any of his predecessors.
According to aides, he wants lunch at Churchill’s birthplace, the magnificent Blenheim Palace, where the gilt and ornamentation predate Trump Tower by two centuries. He wants a private tour of the Churchill War Rooms, with the foreign secretary as his deferential guide. Most audaciously he wants the Queen to ask him not to Windsor or Buckingham Palace but to Balmoral, which has always been a private retreat. To show that he can push the boundaries even further, he’s said to want to play a round of golf on its private course while the Queen, who is no golfer, is made to watch. It’s the ultimate expression of infantile hunger to be the centre of attention; requiring the world’s best-known monarch to endure being bored while you show off.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
I don't believe the NHS will receive £350m from any net savings we may achieve in the public finances from ending our contributions to the EU budget, no.
I think it may get 75-125m a week with - possibly - a postdated pledge to raise in to that level in nominal terms post-Brexit, which HMG will politically get away with.
But all political campaigns are moronic. This one was for the highest possible stakes and both sides took absolutely no prisoners.
She's had 65 years of having to entertain the mad, bad and clearly insane (and no doubt the Banqueting with The Donald before you can say "Donald Where's Your Trousers"...)
Trump reportedly wants a grander visit than any of his predecessors.
According to aides, he wants lunch at Churchill’s birthplace, the magnificent Blenheim Palace, where the gilt and ornamentation predate Trump Tower by two centuries. He wants a private tour of the Churchill War Rooms, with the foreign secretary as his deferential guide. Most audaciously he wants the Queen to ask him not to Windsor or Buckingham Palace but to Balmoral, which has always been a private retreat. To show that he can push the boundaries even further, he’s said to want to play a round of golf on its private course while the Queen, who is no golfer, is made to watch. It’s the ultimate expression of infantile hunger to be the centre of attention; requiring the world’s best-known monarch to endure being bored while you show off.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
She's had 65 years of having to entertain the mad, bad and clearly insane (and no doubt the Banqueting with The Donald before you can say "Donald Where's Your Trousers"...)
Trump reportedly wants a grander visit than any of his predecessors.
According to aides, he wants lunch at Churchill’s birthplace, the magnificent Blenheim Palace, where the gilt and ornamentation predate Trump Tower by two centuries. He wants a private tour of the Churchill War Rooms, with the foreign secretary as his deferential guide. Most audaciously he wants the Queen to ask him not to Windsor or Buckingham Palace but to Balmoral, which has always been a private retreat. To show that he can push the boundaries even further, he’s said to want to play a round of golf on its private course while the Queen, who is no golfer, is made to watch. It’s the ultimate expression of infantile hunger to be the centre of attention; requiring the world’s best-known monarch to endure being bored while you show off.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
I refer you to 'All Out War' for the inside story on that whole sorry saga. I'm possibly being unkind, but the original poster was published immediately after Vote Leave were selected as the official campaign. To quote the book:
"Perhaps it was tiredness, perhaps it was overconfidence, but the poster promised to spend the UK’s entire £350 million weekly contribution to the EU on the NHS – the only time they ever said the whole sum would go to the Health Service. ‘That was one of our campaign fuck-ups,’ a campaign source admitted. ‘We’d had an argument about the wording internally. But as ever the ruling was, “It’s a row we want to have.”’
He is the least "Remainy" of the four choices though... Maybe its his silly tweets. I thought it 50/50 at the start of the week, so should really be backing Lab now. Don't really have a big position on it, do you?
No, I've kept out of this one. I'm on Labour in Copeland.
If I had to choose, I'd also back Labour in Stoke (I think they should be mild favourites), but it's a hard one to read.
I think Labour will hold Stoke.
Copeland, less sure. What makes me hesitate is that there is a future for a Tory MP for Copeland (as he or she will contest and most likely claim the enlarged Barrow seat at the next General Election).
Unless Woodcock goes, there is no future for a Labour MP for Copeland.
So, I just wonder if this makes the Tory candidate and team more motivated in what will be a close by-election.
Interesting that on Vote UK Forum there are polls on both by elections. By their nature they are self selecting - 68% currently expect a Labour hold in Stoke with 62% predicting the same outcome in Copeland.
She's had 65 years of having to entertain the mad, bad and clearly insane (and no doubt the Banqueting with The Donald before you can say "Donald Where's Your Trousers"...)
Trump reportedly wants a grander visit than any of his predecessors.
According to aides, he wants lunch at Churchill’s birthplace, the magnificent Blenheim Palace, where the gilt and ornamentation predate Trump Tower by two centuries. He wants a private tour of the Churchill War Rooms, with the foreign secretary as his deferential guide. Most audaciously he wants the Queen to ask him not to Windsor or Buckingham Palace but to Balmoral, which has always been a private retreat. To show that he can push the boundaries even further, he’s said to want to play a round of golf on its private course while the Queen, who is no golfer, is made to watch. It’s the ultimate expression of infantile hunger to be the centre of attention; requiring the world’s best-known monarch to endure being bored while you show off.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
I refer you to 'All Out War' for the inside story on that whole sorry saga. I'm possibly being unkind, but the original poster was published immediately after Vote Leave were selected as the official campaign. To quote the book:
"Perhaps it was tiredness, perhaps it was overconfidence, but the poster promised to spend the UK’s entire £350 million weekly contribution to the EU on the NHS – the only time they ever said the whole sum would go to the Health Service. ‘That was one of our campaign fuck-ups,’ a campaign source admitted. ‘We’d had an argument about the wording internally. But as ever the ruling was, “It’s a row we want to have.”’
That ruling came from Cummings afaik.
Yes it was masterful tactics - the more it was talked about the more it was talked about. Transparently obviously it wasn't a case of amount; I don't think £280m or £140m would have had any different effect, frankly.
I suppose that that's where we are with political campaigning now. Whatever works. But some people on here were castigating MPs for saying anything to get elected, and then betraying their constituents once in power. Here we have precisely the same thing and now it has become a good thing.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
I am kind of thinking you are giving too much credit to people. I am not sure that any of those who previously supported the number have changed their tune about it. It is only those who said it as a mistake from the start who are still saying the same. I have certainly seen plenty of people still trying to justify it and believe they genuinely believe that. I just find the arguments unconvincing.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
Without doubt.
Edit: although as @isam has pointed out, we might have had to wait for 2030 to pick on some of the Remainers' contentions.
The questions for Theresa May will be more awkward than the questions for Donald Trump. He will say whatever he feels like while she will be mindful that her own domestic audience is rather less accepting of alternative facts and alternative moralities.
The sky reporter "quoting" intelligence sources thay giving terrorist suspects a bottle of beer often more effective than torture...given most of the people who have been tortured by the us are strict Muslims somehow doubt that unless they mean they threaten to force feed said beer.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
The questions for Theresa May will be more awkward than the questions for Donald Trump. He will say whatever he feels like while she will be mindful that her own domestic audience is rather less accepting of alternative facts and alternative moralities.
She will not tolerate torture or any attack on women
The sky reporter "quoting" intelligence sources thay giving terrorist suspects a bottle of beer often more effective than torture...given most of the people who have been tortured by the us are strict Muslims somehow doubt that unless they mean they threaten to force feed said beer.
Is this US or UK sources? Maybe the are talking about experience with Irish dissidents
Does anyone have a view on Political Betting, rather than repeating what they hope/forecast will happen because Leave won?
What has changed in the last 3 days to make UKIP go from 2.6 to 1.8 in Stoke? Any ideas?
I've been scratching my head about this one. A private poll is the best I can think of. It's not as though it's a particularly thin market either. Perhaps it's just weight of money - kippers' hopes spring eternal and some rightwing Tories are secretly eager to see Labour dished by anyone, even a rival party.
On the evidence publicly available, Labour should be about 1.2 in my opinion. Even that would be an illustration of what a parlous state Labour are in at present.
Looks to me like Labour have done some polling there and they don't like what they are seeing.
Really, Labour should hold both comfortably. At this rate I'll be topping up my Labour position with perhaps the tiniest hint of LD at 50ish for a giggle.
In the run up to the Brexit debate, I made a habit of reading the opinions of the average football supporter on numerous football forums.
Stoke City have a forum, and it was abundantly clear from that sample. that they were going to vote out, assuming they were representative of the average person from that area. The same was also obvious in Sunderland as well.
Reading the same forum on the subject of the upcoming by-election, it looks like Labour versus UKIP, with the Tories automatically dismissed and the Lib Dems not even worthy of a mention. Opinion seems fairly evenly divided, though Labour barely merit a good word ('failed the area'), while UKIP seem to be the "what have we got to lose?" option.
I'd imagine that any Brexit related obstacles that can be pinned at Labour's door will play into UKIP's hands.
If A50 proceeds smoothly, Labour should hold, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.
The questions for Theresa May will be more awkward than the questions for Donald Trump. He will say whatever he feels like while she will be mindful that her own domestic audience is rather less accepting of alternative facts and alternative moralities.
She will not tolerate torture or any attack on women
And then she has to find a form of words that isn't going to upset the thin-skinned toupéed tangerine that's standing next to her.
The questions for Theresa May will be more awkward than the questions for Donald Trump. He will say whatever he feels like while she will be mindful that her own domestic audience is rather less accepting of alternative facts and alternative moralities.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
A few non sequiturs there
You have just summed up PB. Please do tell where they occur in this instance.
The problem that "remain" have with any sort of moral castigation of "leave" was that David Cameron was front and centre of the 'Remain' campaign. He made it absolubtely clear in all of his previous campaigns that he would stop at absolutely nothing to secure victory, here's a poster depicting Alex Salmond as a thief: http://tinyurl.com/jgz4be5
Leave always had to play hardball to win, and don't forget there is no ASA with regards to political adverts. It was always going to get filthy.
Why do MPs not simply vote according to their constituency result? That way each MP is safe in their constituency and the result is a strong leave vote in favour of A50?
I would vote for it - but if I was a Labour MP, Corbyn's outrageous 3 line whip would make me want to vote against. The most rebellious MP in parliament demanding a 3 line whip, really?
Of course the PLP seems to be composed almost entirely of eunuchs so the rebellion was predictably short lived. The PLP are digging their own graves, Corbyn is just handing them the shovels.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
They also denied certain obvious consequences of staying in. Though again those would have taken time to materialise.
The problem that "remain" have with any sort of moral castigation of "leave" was that David Cameron was front and centre of the 'Remain' campaign. He made it absolubtely clear in all of his previous campaigns that he would stop at absolutely nothing to secure victory, here's a poster depicting Alex Salmond as a thief: http://tinyurl.com/jgz4be5
Leave always had to play hardball to win, and don't forget there is no ASA with regards to political adverts. It was always going to get filthy.
I'm not castigating Leave, I'm interested in where we have come to in political debate and how we view the pronouncements of politicians.
Edit: well I am castigating leave but that's a pre-vote discussion.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
Possibly because there weren't and positives extravagant or otherwise to staying in the EU
Does anyone have a view on Political Betting, rather than repeating what they hope/forecast will happen because Leave won?
What has changed in the last 3 days to make UKIP go from 2.6 to 1.8 in Stoke? Any ideas?
I've been scratching my head about this one. A private poll is the best I can think of. It's not as though it's a particularly thin market either. Perhaps it's just weight of money - kippers' hopes spring eternal and some rightwing Tories are secretly eager to see Labour dished by anyone, even a rival party.
On the evidence publicly available, Labour should be about 1.2 in my opinion. Even that would be an illustration of what a parlous state Labour are in at present.
Looks to me like Labour have done some polling there and they don't like what they are seeing.
Really, Labour should hold both comfortably. At this rate I'll be topping up my Labour position with perhaps the tiniest hint of LD at 50ish for a giggle.
In the run up to the Brexit debate, I made a habit of reading the opinions of the average football supporter on numerous football forums.
Stoke City have a forum, and it was abundantly clear from that sample. that they were going to vote out, assuming they were representative of the average person from that area. The same was also obvious in Sunderland as well.
Reading the same forum on the subject of the upcoming by-election, it looks like Labour versus UKIP, with the Tories automatically dismissed and the Lib Dems not even worthy of a mention. Opinion seems fairly evenly divided, though Labour barely merit a good word ('failed the area'), while UKIP seem to be the "what have we got to lose?" option.
I'd imagine that any Brexit related obstacles that can be pinned at Labour's door will play into UKIP's hands.
If A50 proceeds smoothly, Labour should hold, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.
Am not persuaded that Brexit will swing as many votes as widely assumed.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
That ruling came from Cummings afaik.
Yes it was masterful tactics - the more it was talked about the more it was talked about. Transparently obviously it wasn't a case of amount; I don't think £280m or £140m would have had any different effect, frankly.
I suppose that that's where we are with political campaigning now. Whatever works. But some people on here were castigating MPs for saying anything to get elected, and then betraying their constituents once in power. Here we have precisely the same thing and now it has become a good thing.
I don't see it as a good thing. Winning at all costs has never been attractive to me, neither do I feel that the ends justify the means.
I thought the governments lies and exaggerations were disgraceful. I thought the same about both Leave.EU and Vote.Leave campaigns. The 'Turks are coming!" aspect was particularly repellent (strangely, the 'breaking point' poster didn't upset me, as I thought it was referring to the old 'Labour isn't working' campaign. It wasn't until I'd seen some of the 1930s stuff that I got it).
Grubby business, politics. I came away from reading Shipman's book mainly thinking that I never want to meet Mr Cummings .
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
They considered making a positive case for the EU, but concluded there wasn't one.
Dominic Waghorn on Sky is so biased against Trump and May he cannot get any balance in his reporting and it is all a disaster for TM. He sounds like a Cliinton spokesperson
What hope is there for social democracy in UK in next few years when one can read this:
"Labour is effectively led by a triumvirate – Corbyn, plus Abbott and McDonnell, the two MPs who are most influential upon his thinking – though Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary is growing in importance."
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, hence was instrumental in securing victory, andhence that that is a good thing.
Am not persuaded that Brexit will swing as many votes as widely assumed.
I don't think Brexit will make any difference if A50 goes through parliament without issue.
If there is some impediment, then I think it may well spur a lot of people who are basically just fed up with the establishment - and in Stoke, Labour are the establishment.
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, was instrumental in securing victory, and that that is a good thing.
It was an exaggeration. But, if Remain had won, we'd be picking on theirs.
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
They considered making a positive case for the EU, but concluded there wasn't one.
There's a very positive case for the EU. There's not much of a positive case for Cameron's position which was like encouraging people to go to a jazz club by saying "I don't like the music any more than you but we've got these great new earplugs."
Thanks for spreading the message and helping us secure victory.
Do you believe that the NHS will receive that £350m/week?
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
We have done the £350m on here dozens of times. In fact, nearly every time Scott posts that tweet - which is becoming just as tedious.
I know but it's interesting to me that AFAICR no one hitherto has acknowledged that it was not true, that it helped Leave to win, and is happy with that.
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
But on the other hand some of us said right back when the campaign was going on that it was a daft number to use. Given that the real accurate number would have been around £280 million a week it seemed particularly daft to use a number that could be reasonably challenged when there was a similarly huge number that could not be challenged. I note that Cummings did justify the number but I found his justification weak.
Yes exactly. I don't mean to pick on @Casino_Royale but I'm interested to see that we have moved, perhaps only on PB, to the position whereby it is acknowledged that it was a lie/economic with the actualite, hence</> was instrumental in securing victory, andhence</> that that is a good thing.
Dominic Waghorn on Sky is so biased against Trump and May he cannot get any balance in his reporting and it is all a disaster for TM. He sounds like a Cliinton spokesperson
There is no doubt that he hopes TM fails
It reminds me of the media coverage of cuts ...the world was going to end...and when it didn't the media have set the bar so low they have used all their outrage ammunition up.
@michaelsavage: A Labour frontbencher resigns over triggering Article 50, confirming that - somehow - the first #Brexit Commons crisis is a Labour one.
Only Labour could table an amendment insisting on EU nationals retaining their rights here in the UK but forget to bother to mention UK nationals living in EU countries.
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
I must have mis-remembered David Cameron going all Dr. Venkman then.
"Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!"
Pretty sure that's what he promised if we voted Leave. A bit more than "bad things".....
To be fair did they make any extravagant positive promises? They just warned of bad things that would happen if we voted to Leave didn't they?
I must have mis-remembered David Cameron going all Dr. Venkman then.
"Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!"
Pretty sure that's what he promised if we voted Leave....
@PaulBrandITV: Tulip Siddiq's resignation is a no-brainer really - a tiny majority in a seat where Remain won by a landslide and Lib Dems are nibbling.
Comments
Now that should be some viewing
Tories +0.85
Labour +293.55
Green +0.85
Lib Dem -17.68
UKIP -425.74
Someone else +0.85
Copeland (Doing nicely)
Tories +187.71
Labour +310.08
Green -181.29
Lib Dem -650.59
UKIP -1730.99
Someone else +190.92
If not, it would be the first time I've heard a Leaver acknowledge that the dissemination of an untruth was critical to Leave's success. And is happy about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Nicholls
PM May, did you give the President a quaich so it would be easy for him to hold in his tiny, tiny hands?
I disagree it's damned forevermore. Even if i recognise you may always hold it so.
I was more upset about Jo Cox and the election of Trump - both unpleasant incidents (and the former a tragedy) that have greatly soured the milk.
She's had 65 years of having to "entertain" the mad, bad and clearly insane (and no doubt will be "Banqueting" with The Donald before you can say "Donald Where's Your Trousers"...)
We have rehearsed at length that both sides lied, the campaign was awful, etc, but not the above.
"Tessie, if I may call you that?"
"No"
Well, Tessie, we had a GREAT chat didn't we....
This is part of the early fruit of the labours of last summer. It will get worse.
According to aides, he wants lunch at Churchill’s birthplace, the magnificent Blenheim Palace, where the gilt and ornamentation predate Trump Tower by two centuries. He wants a private tour of the Churchill War Rooms, with the foreign secretary as his deferential guide. Most audaciously he wants the Queen to ask him not to Windsor or Buckingham Palace but to Balmoral, which has always been a private retreat. To show that he can push the boundaries even further, he’s said to want to play a round of golf on its private course while the Queen, who is no golfer, is made to watch. It’s the ultimate expression of infantile hunger to be the centre of attention; requiring the world’s best-known monarch to endure being bored while you show off.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/trump-s-tantrums-risk-making-his-presidency-a-disaster-g7w0qmgl7
I think it may get 75-125m a week with - possibly - a postdated pledge to raise in to that level in nominal terms post-Brexit, which HMG will politically get away with.
But all political campaigns are moronic. This one was for the highest possible stakes and both sides took absolutely no prisoners.
The man's a dreamer
"Perhaps it was tiredness, perhaps it was overconfidence, but the poster promised to spend the UK’s entire £350 million weekly contribution to the EU on the NHS – the only time they ever said the whole sum would go to the Health Service. ‘That was one of our campaign fuck-ups,’ a campaign source admitted. ‘We’d had an argument about the wording internally. But as ever the ruling was, “It’s a row we want to have.”’
That ruling came from Cummings afaik.
Back of the queue comes to mind
I suppose that that's where we are with political campaigning now. Whatever works. But some people on here were castigating MPs for saying anything to get elected, and then betraying their constituents once in power. Here we have precisely the same thing and now it has become a good thing.
I bet he interrupts her constantly. "wrrroonngg".
Edit: although as @isam has pointed out, we might have had to wait for 2030 to pick on some of the Remainers' contentions.
Stoke City have a forum, and it was abundantly clear from that sample. that they were going to vote out, assuming they were representative of the average person from that area. The same was also obvious in Sunderland as well.
Reading the same forum on the subject of the upcoming by-election, it looks like Labour versus UKIP, with the Tories automatically dismissed and the Lib Dems not even worthy of a mention. Opinion seems fairly evenly divided, though Labour barely merit a good word ('failed the area'), while UKIP seem to be the "what have we got to lose?" option.
I'd imagine that any Brexit related obstacles that can be pinned at Labour's door will play into UKIP's hands.
If A50 proceeds smoothly, Labour should hold, but I wouldn't bet my life on it.
@BBCNormanS: Labour amendments cont... guarantee rights of EU nationals, keep EU tax evasion laws; consult devolved assemblies. 2/2
He made it absolubtely clear in all of his previous campaigns that he would stop at absolutely nothing to secure victory, here's a poster depicting Alex Salmond as a thief: http://tinyurl.com/jgz4be5
Leave always had to play hardball to win, and don't forget there is no ASA with regards to political adverts. It was always going to get filthy.
I would vote for it - but if I was a Labour MP, Corbyn's outrageous 3 line whip would make me want to vote against. The most rebellious MP in parliament demanding a 3 line whip, really?
Of course the PLP seems to be composed almost entirely of eunuchs so the rebellion was predictably short lived. The PLP are digging their own graves, Corbyn is just handing them the shovels.
Edit: well I am castigating leave but that's a pre-vote discussion.
I thought the governments lies and exaggerations were disgraceful. I thought the same about both Leave.EU and Vote.Leave campaigns. The 'Turks are coming!" aspect was particularly repellent (strangely, the 'breaking point' poster didn't upset me, as I thought it was referring to the old 'Labour isn't working' campaign. It wasn't until I'd seen some of the 1930s stuff that I got it).
Grubby business, politics. I came away from reading Shipman's book mainly thinking that I never want to meet Mr Cummings
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/824667237357330432/photo/1
House.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMJcZpvyNok
There is no doubt that he hopes TM fails
"Labour is effectively led by a triumvirate – Corbyn, plus Abbott and McDonnell, the two MPs who are most influential upon his thinking – though Emily Thornberry, the shadow foreign secretary is growing in importance."
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/01/why-has-jeremy-corbyn-committed-labour-voting-article-50
Not content with tweeting his own name, he tweeted his password instead...
I don't see the inherent links
If there is some impediment, then I think it may well spur a lot of people who are basically just fed up with the establishment - and in Stoke, Labour are the establishment.
@PaulBrandITV: And one slightly unexpected amendment: Labour will only vote for Article 50 if PM promises not to turn the UK into a tax haven
They said there would be a 3 line whip to vote for it...
The British Consumer will ALWAYS carry on Spending LOL!
https://order-order.com/2017/01/26/shadow-minister-tulip-siddiq-resigns/
A Labour MP resigns from Corbyn's front bench.
"Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!"
Pretty sure that's what he promised if we voted Leave. A bit more than "bad things".....