Brexit capital or no, if UKIP can't win in Stoke with their leader standing, they won't win any Labour seats. Their much publicised Northern breakthrough will last as long as Jurgen Klopp's wonder side. Will have to go back to pestering Tories on the East coast.
Yep, this is their Gettysburg. Weak local candidate vs party leader. Strong Leave vote. Labour leader madder by the day. If they can't win Stoke, we can stick a fork in 'em and call it done.
I'm still not convinced it is easy as all that.
In Copeland, the Cons are only 2k votes behind so can hope to win on differential turnout without needing switchers. It is also a clear 2 horse race In Stoke, UKIP are 5k votes behind and competing with the Cons for second place. Even if some Lab sit on their hands, UKIP still also need to get switchers from either Con or Lab.
So many of these occurrences of these incidents now, I think we need a thread on top 10...I think my favourite was the one where he is approached, comes towards the camera / reporter, reporter says Mr corbyn .... from sky news and he does an about turn and runs through some doors.
Mr. Jessop, having a mechanism to leave but making it tedious for those concerned is daft.
Mr. Vale2, I also think the Lib Dems will be resurgent. Aren't they focusing on Stoke?
Multiple countries are involved. Lawyers are involved. Worse, highly paid, international lawyers are involved. They want tedious, partly because they earn more, and partly because the agreements have to have a certain complexity.
As an aside, has any lawyer ever simplified a contract or agreement ?
Mr. Jessop, having a mechanism to leave but making it tedious for those concerned is daft.
Mr. Vale2, I also think the Lib Dems will be resurgent. Aren't they focusing on Stoke?
Multiple countries are involved. Lawyers are involved. Worse, highly paid, international lawyers are involved. They want tedious, partly because they earn more, and partly because the agreements have to have a certain complexity.
As an aside, has any lawyer ever simplified a contract or agreement ?
A nice feature of Roman names was that significant feats would get you a new name. So, Titus Manlius slew a massive Gaul in a duel and took his torque, and became Titus Manlius Torquatus. Marcus Valerius did something similar but was aided by a crow, and became Marcus Valerius Corvus.
Does make me wonder what names our politicians would have added. David Hubris Cameron? Edward Stone Miliband? Margaret Falklands Thatcher?
I find it quite bizarre that UKIP were ever favourites for this seat. I expect a pretty comfortable Labour hold on a very low turnout.
I'd expect turnout to be better than 'very low', even accepting the Stoke Central baseline. I'd be surprised if it's not in the 30s. On that basis, Labour should hold. If it is sub-25, UKIP will stand a good chance. Mike's point is right though: UKIP are not very good at election campaigning and are short of important data which will matter.
DavidL is quite right that it's bizarre that UKIP were ever favourites given these drags on their vote share and where they're starting from. Personally, I reckon they should be nearer 2/1.
Oh yes, I was not suggesting anything lower than 30%. In the 30s is very low for a Parliamentary vote.
It's not all that low for a by-election. The turnouts this parliament have been:
So the middle half form the range 37-43. The lower 30s is lowish for a by-election (and that's where I think Stoke will come in) but it's nothing extraordinary.
Note that in this story the culprit faces "four years in jail" for causing "some redness in the woman's shins". America is as mad as us. Hence, Trump.
I find it odd that someone who a couple of days ago was crying over a tragic picture of a victim of Nazi aggression - including comments about her being beaten before death - now excuses violence by talking about "some redness in the woman's shins".
Violence of any sort is to be abhorred, not excused.
A nice feature of Roman names was that significant feats would get you a new name. So, Titus Manlius slew a massive Gaul in a duel and took his torque, and became Titus Manlius Torquatus. Marcus Valerius did something similar but was aided by a crow, and became Marcus Valerius Corvus.
Does make me wonder what names our politicians would have added. David Hubris Cameron? Edward Stone Miliband? Margaret Falklands Thatcher?
That's still theoretically the case in Britain. Viscount Montgomery of Alemein, for example.
Note that in this story the culprit faces "four years in jail" for causing "some redness in the woman's shins". America is as mad as us. Hence, Trump.
I find it odd that someone who a couple of days ago was crying over a tragic picture of a victim of Nazi aggression - including comments about her being beaten before death - now excuses violence by talking about "some redness in the woman's shins".
Violence of any sort is to be abhorred, not excused.
US loves long sentences...4 years will be what is asked for, not given.
Mr. Jessop, having a mechanism to leave but making it tedious for those concerned is daft.
Mr. Vale2, I also think the Lib Dems will be resurgent. Aren't they focusing on Stoke?
Multiple countries are involved. Lawyers are involved. Worse, highly paid, international lawyers are involved. They want tedious, partly because they earn more, and partly because the agreements have to have a certain complexity.
As an aside, has any lawyer ever simplified a contract or agreement ?
Mr. Herdson, not really. Titles associated with places are different to an additional name which may or may not have a geographical aspect. There's Scipio Africanus, of course, but also Quintus Fabius Maximus.
A nice feature of Roman names was that significant feats would get you a new name. So, Titus Manlius slew a massive Gaul in a duel and took his torque, and became Titus Manlius Torquatus. Marcus Valerius did something similar but was aided by a crow, and became Marcus Valerius Corvus.
Does make me wonder what names our politicians would have added. David Hubris Cameron? Edward Stone Miliband? Margaret Falklands Thatcher?
If 'significant feats' get me a new name, would I be Plebius Jessopius Littoreus Ambulans ?
(my Latin's awful, so please feel free to rip the above to shreds).
@Ed_Miliband: PM's refusal to condemn Trump Muslim ban is shocking, wrong and cannot stand. It flies in the face of the values of people across Britain.
Mr. Jessop, by that, I'm referring to the apparent necessity of us leaving this Euratom thingummyjig only to rejoin it immediately as an associate.
Actually, Mr D, our departure from Euratom is specified in the A50 Bill.
Only because Lisbon+ says we have to.
So if I've got this straight, it's because the Lisbon Treaty supersedes membership of Euratom. So all those hyper-ventilating scientists should calm down, we have not suddenly turned anti-science or anti-nuclear it's simply that we won't be able to be a member of Euratom due to EU membership, we will have to replace it with an associate membership like Switzerland.
Mr. Herdson, not really. Titles associated with places are different to an additional name which may or may not have a geographical aspect. There's Scipio Africanus, of course, but also Quintus Fabius Maximus.
I accept that it's not quite the same in that a title doesn't form part of the name per se, but it is still an inherited attribute of the name so surely a close modern parallel? (And there is form from Rome for an overlap between the two, at the very highest level, with Caesar, Augustus and Imperator having all been personal taken names of Octavian - albeit that Imperator was itself a title taken as a name).
Mr. Jessop, by that, I'm referring to the apparent necessity of us leaving this Euratom thingummyjig only to rejoin it immediately as an associate.
Actually, Mr D, our departure from Euratom is specified in the A50 Bill.
Only because Lisbon+ says we have to.
So if I've got this straight, it's because the Lisbon Treaty supersedes membership of Euratom. So all those hyper-ventilating scientists should calm down, we have not suddenly turned anti-science or anti-nuclear it's simply that we won't be able to be a member of Euratom due to EU membership, we will have to replace it with an associate membership like Switzerland.
First there was Lisbon (2007). Then there was the EU Amendment Act (2008). This incorporated Euratom under the auspices of the EU (it was originally created under the Treaty of Rome).
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
@Ed_Miliband: PM's refusal to condemn Trump Muslim ban is shocking, wrong and cannot stand. It flies in the face of the values of people across Britain.
Seriously, if you're praying in favour of Ed Miliband (who? - ed.) wait until you find a better quote.
@Ed_Miliband: PM's refusal to condemn Trump Muslim ban is shocking, wrong and cannot stand. It flies in the face of the values of people across Britain.
Trump is out of order and I doubt this policy will last long.
Theresa May's response that America has it's policy and UK has ours is the only response most every leader would give.
But those on the left will continue with their fury but I am not sure it will take them far
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
Separately, Germany and France are also continuing to work on creating a joint tactical airlift pool of Lockheed Martin Corp C-130J military transport planes, a spokesman for the German defense ministry said on Saturday.
A nice feature of Roman names was that significant feats would get you a new name. So, Titus Manlius slew a massive Gaul in a duel and took his torque, and became Titus Manlius Torquatus. Marcus Valerius did something similar but was aided by a crow, and became Marcus Valerius Corvus.
Does make me wonder what names our politicians would have added. David Hubris Cameron? Edward Stone Miliband? Margaret Falklands Thatcher?
Would this be the same France that has banned the burqa, and the same Germany that proposes to do the same? Unlike Britain and America?
Just checking.
Here's the French foreign minister's coruscating condemnation of Trump. I'm sure he'll be a-quaking in his boots:
"This can only worry us, but there are many subjects that worry us, welcoming refugees who flee war and oppression is part of our duty."
The Germans put the boot in:
"The United States is a country where Christian traditions have an important meaning. Loving your neighbor is a major Christian value, and that includes helping people."
It seems that some of our resident Leavers are having difficulty with the concept that Brexit means Brexit.
It seems that some of our resident Remainers have not learned to avoid being smug and self satisfied in their scorn for the views of others.
I thought I was merely being explanatory and educating the great unwashed of PB. Now my feelings are all bruised and everything.
Re Ed Miliband, of whom Scott and Paste seems to be the latest fanboi, does he follow every tweet with an awkward rephrasing to make sure people get the stilted sound bite??
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
I can't believe Sarah Perry's searing, bleak, heartfelt Guardian confessional of modern human suffering - Did Writing A Novel Make Me Ill? - has only received two comments in five hours. It's like people have become inured to the horror.
@Ed_Miliband: PM's refusal to condemn Trump Muslim ban is shocking, wrong and cannot stand. It flies in the face of the values of people across Britain.
Trump is out of order and I doubt this policy will last long.
Theresa May's response that America has it's policy and UK has ours is the only response most every leader would give.
But those on the left will continue with their fury but I am not sure it will take them far
I think the policy needs to be a bit more sensitively applied. It seems unnecessary to apply it to people who are Green cardholders already.
A moratorium on new applications, and across a wider range of countries, while drafting new more stringent requirements would be entirely reasonable.
It does seem Trump has torn up the refugee convention. Rather unfair on legitimate refugees, but the existing convention does need extensive revision.
@Ed_Miliband: PM's refusal to condemn Trump Muslim ban is shocking, wrong and cannot stand. It flies in the face of the values of people across Britain.
Trump is out of order and I doubt this policy will last long.
Theresa May's response that America has it's policy and UK has ours is the only response most every leader would give.
But those on the left will continue with their fury but I am not sure it will take them far
Genuine question: why is Trump "out of order"? He was elected on a platform of banning Muslim migration altogether. If anything, this edict is milder than his mandated proposal.
Note that in this story the culprit faces "four years in jail" for causing "some redness in the woman's shins". America is as mad as us. Hence, Trump.
I find it odd that someone who a couple of days ago was crying over a tragic picture of a victim of Nazi aggression - including comments about her being beaten before death - now excuses violence by talking about "some redness in the woman's shins".
Violence of any sort is to be abhorred, not excused.
The man's a dick, probably a drunken dick (he flew in "from Aruba"). Give him a sobering fine, some public shame, or a few weeks in the clink. I doubt he will do it again.
The girl in the photo was fourteen years old. She was gassed or killed by phenol injection. Your attempt to find equivalence is as absurd as it is repulsive.
It is neither. Your words just show that your blubbing the other day was as false as your fiction.
And the equivalence is simple: this idiot's actions was the sort of hatred that allowed Nazism to breed in Germany in the 1930s. And your attitude - a turning of the cheek amongst the moderately sane - aided and abetted it.
A woman was trying to do her job, and she was harassed and assaulted. I bet the fact it happened in an airport won't exactly be a mitigating factor.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
I wonder about the media hysteria over what Trump has done. Banning people from certain Muslim countries?
Europe is hyper-ventilating, yet recall that Geert Wilders is likely to come first in the Dutch elections, and he wants to ban The Koran.
This anti-Islamic discourse is inevitable, and will grow, and it will become mainstream, unless there is some miraculous Enlightenment within Islam itself. Trump is the future.
There is a significant difference between Trump and the European far right. Trump is just opposed to Islamism, whereas the mainland European nationalists (FN/Jobbik/AfD etc.) are anti-muslim per se, and also antisemitic (unlike Trump, or UKIP).
@Ed_Miliband: PM's refusal to condemn Trump Muslim ban is shocking, wrong and cannot stand. It flies in the face of the values of people across Britain.
Trump is out of order and I doubt this policy will last long.
Theresa May's response that America has it's policy and UK has ours is the only response most every leader would give.
But those on the left will continue with their fury but I am not sure it will take them far
Genuine question: why is Trump "out of order"? He was elected on a platform of banning Muslim migration altogether. If anything, this edict is milder than his mandated proposal.
@JustinWolfers: If the only we had implemented Trump's immigration ban list a decade ago, we could have prevented exactly 0 acts of Islamic terror in the US
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
I wonder about the media hysteria over what Trump has done. Banning people from certain Muslim countries?
Europe is hyper-ventilating, yet recall that Geert Wilders is likely to come first in the Dutch elections, and he wants to ban The Koran.
This anti-Islamic discourse is inevitable, and will grow, and it will become mainstream, unless there is some miraculous Enlightenment within Islam itself. Trump is the future.
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
Less than 1 in a 1,000, and the outrage is mostly due to people not understanding why we are leaving, and assuming something else. Of course a more interesting question is why cooperation on nuclear energy matters became entangled with EU membership. It's almost as though the EU has become what we long feared it would.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
Seriously? Having been deemed worthy of permanent residence it's outrageous to suddennly be stranded abroad because the rules have changed.
In any case, many countries don't allow dual citizenship, e.g. Germany, India, China.
I'm waiting for clarity as to whether this is HS enforcing the XO, or the airlines over-reacting on the precautionary principle.
If airlines transport people who are forbidden to enter the USA, do the airlines have to return them to the country of embarkation?
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
I wonder about the media hysteria over what Trump has done. Banning people from certain Muslim countries?
Europe is hyper-ventilating, yet recall that Geert Wilders is likely to come first in the Dutch elections, and he wants to ban The Koran.
This anti-Islamic discourse is inevitable, and will grow, and it will become mainstream, unless there is some miraculous Enlightenment within Islam itself. Trump is the future.
Trump is the past. 1933 to be precise.
Hilariously, Trump appears to be heading for an immigration policy that mirrors that of... the Gulf states. Complete with religious litmus tests....
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
Seriously? Having been deemed worthy of permanent residence it's outrageous to suddennly be stranded abroad because the rules have changed.
In any case, many countries don't allow dual citizenship, e.g. Germany, India, China.
I'm waiting for clarity as to whether this is HS enforcing the XO, or the airlines over-reacting on the precautionary principle.
If airlines transport people who are forbidden to enter the USA, do the airlines have to return them to the country of embarkation?
I believe so. Still trying to get some clarity on the green card wossname. Conflicting reports atm.
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
Less than 1 in a 1,000, and the outrage is mostly due to people not understanding why we are leaving, and assuming something else. Of course a more interesting question is why cooperation on nuclear energy matters became entangled with EU membership. It's almost as though the EU has become what we long feared it would.
It was there from the start. Euratom was created at the same time as the EEC and shared institutions from 1967 i.e. before the UK joined.
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
I'm not outraged, but I'm unsurprised such an issue has arisen, and think there will be many more. The divorce is going to be messy, even if it might eventually be in the best interests of both parties.
And yes, I did know roughly what Euratom does. Then again, it's the sort of area I'm interested in.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
Seriously? Having been deemed worthy of permanent residence it's outrageous to suddennly be stranded abroad because the rules have changed.
In any case, many countries don't allow dual citizenship, e.g. Germany, India, China.
I'm waiting for clarity as to whether this is HS enforcing the XO, or the airlines over-reacting on the precautionary principle.
If airlines transport people who are forbidden to enter the USA, do the airlines have to return them to the country of embarkation?
Yes, and at the airline's expense. Applies universally, so airlines always check that travellers have appropriate visas for their destination.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
Seriously? Having been deemed worthy of permanent residence it's outrageous to suddennly be stranded abroad because the rules have changed.
In any case, many countries don't allow dual citizenship, e.g. Germany, India, China.
I'm waiting for clarity as to whether this is HS enforcing the XO, or the airlines over-reacting on the precautionary principle.
If airlines transport people who are forbidden to enter the USA, do the airlines have to return them to the country of embarkation?
Yes. And face a substantial fine for bringing them in the first place.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
I wonder about the media hysteria over what Trump has done. Banning people from certain Muslim countries?
Europe is hyper-ventilating, yet recall that Geert Wilders is likely to come first in the Dutch elections, and he wants to ban The Koran.
This anti-Islamic discourse is inevitable, and will grow, and it will become mainstream, unless there is some miraculous Enlightenment within Islam itself. Trump is the future.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
I wonder about the media hysteria over what Trump has done. Banning people from certain Muslim countries?
Europe is hyper-ventilating, yet recall that Geert Wilders is likely to come first in the Dutch elections, and he wants to ban The Koran.
This anti-Islamic discourse is inevitable, and will grow, and it will become mainstream, unless there is some miraculous Enlightenment within Islam itself. Trump is the future.
I can't believe Sarah Perry's searing, bleak, heartfelt Guardian confessional of modern human suffering - Did Writing A Novel Make Me Ill? - has only received two comments in five hours. It's like people have become inured to the horror.
Clip of Theresa May says the 'United States is responsible for its policy on refugees, the UK is responsible for its refugees' sounded a good response. No other leader has condemned the US so far.
The Fench and German ministers say it can only 'worry us'
This is going to be a big story but there is no saying that the polarised views will change much
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
Less than 1 in a 1,000, and the outrage is mostly due to people not understanding why we are leaving, and assuming something else. Of course a more interesting question is why cooperation on nuclear energy matters became entangled with EU membership. It's almost as though the EU has become what we long feared it would.
No!! Never!!! Well I'll go to the foot of my stairs.
Lol, Tessy getting a lesson in morality from Erdogan. Presumably she'll get in a zinger about Turkey being responsible for Turkey's policy on refugees.
So it seems that Trump's visa ban includes green cards for citizens from the "Axis of Islam". People who may have lawfully lived in the US for decades and who happened to be on holiday this week are being barred from re-entering.
If memory serves, that happened to Charlie Chaplin. Although surprisingly I have not a lot of sympathy here. If you intend to live in a country long-term and don't take out at least dual citizenship, you do lay yourself open to this sort of thing.
I wonder about the media hysteria over what Trump has done. Banning people from certain Muslim countries?
Europe is hyper-ventilating, yet recall that Geert Wilders is likely to come first in the Dutch elections, and he wants to ban The Koran.
This anti-Islamic discourse is inevitable, and will grow, and it will become mainstream, unless there is some miraculous Enlightenment within Islam itself. Trump is the future.
@ValaAfshar: US tech companies founded by 1st/2nd generation immigrants
Apple Google Facebook Amazon Oracle IBM Uber Yahoo EMC eBay AT&T Tesla Reddit
Apple is quite poignant: Steve Jobs' natural father was a Syrian Muslim.
Who he never met.
Actually, they probably did, although they didn't realise it at the time. His father worked in a cafe which Jobs used to go. (From my memory of the official biography)
Leaving that aside it seems a slightly odd point for you to be making.
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
It's an AndAnotherThing about Brexit. I've yet to hear of one incontrovertible and concrete benefit to Brexit. I'm not talking about sovereignty and taking control, which are arguable and in any case there are two sides to those coins.
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
We are going to see a whole series of eruptions of ill-informed outrage as it sinks in what leaving the EU means, aren't we?
I wonder how many people who are outraged at the UK leaving Euratom have any idea what it does.
Less than 1 in a 1,000, and the outrage is mostly due to people not understanding why we are leaving, and assuming something else. Of course a more interesting question is why cooperation on nuclear energy matters became entangled with EU membership. It's almost as though the EU has become what we long feared it would.
It was there from the start. Euratom was created at the same time as the EEC and shared institutions from 1967 i.e. before the UK joined.
True, but it was originally a separate organisation with its own treaty. This is a good illustration of one of the big EU problems, that EU membership comes as a package, it's not flexible, and to solve one issue in particular (immigration control) we are having to leave the EU, single market, customs union, Euratom and much more. A bit of real flexibility and in all likelihood we would have voted to remain.
Comments
In Copeland, the Cons are only 2k votes behind so can hope to win on differential turnout without needing switchers. It is also a clear 2 horse race
In Stoke, UKIP are 5k votes behind and competing with the Cons for second place. Even if some Lab sit on their hands, UKIP still also need to get switchers from either Con or Lab.
If they let us back in, that is.
Mr. Jessop, having a mechanism to leave but making it tedious for those concerned is daft.
Mr. Vale2, I also think the Lib Dems will be resurgent. Aren't they focusing on Stoke?
"DA: Man kicked Muslim woman at JFK airport, said 'Trump is here now'"
http://tinyurl.com/j6a938x
As an aside, has any lawyer ever simplified a contract or agreement ?
[I must be quite tired too, I almost called you King Jessop].
http://politicalbetting.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/negotiations-and-love-songs-why.html
A nice feature of Roman names was that significant feats would get you a new name. So, Titus Manlius slew a massive Gaul in a duel and took his torque, and became Titus Manlius Torquatus. Marcus Valerius did something similar but was aided by a crow, and became Marcus Valerius Corvus.
Does make me wonder what names our politicians would have added. David Hubris Cameron? Edward Stone Miliband? Margaret Falklands Thatcher?
40.3 - Oldham W
33.2 - Sheffield Brightside
43.0 - Ogmore
42.5 - Tooting
25.8 - Batley & Spen
46.8 - Witney
53.4 - Richmond Park
37.1 - Sleaford
So the middle half form the range 37-43. The lower 30s is lowish for a by-election (and that's where I think Stoke will come in) but it's nothing extraordinary.
Violence of any sort is to be abhorred, not excused.
@ShippersUnbound: "The United States is responsible for the United States' policy on refugees". May fails again to condemn Trump
@RobDotHutton: And this after twice ignoring the question when politely asked. We had to shout it out. twitter.com/ShippersUnboun…
@paulwaugh: Proud to say we in the Lobby heckled the PM until she answered the question about Trump's Muslim and refugee ban.
BTW, did your prediction: "It will tinker round the edges, but I expect the tax legislation to be lengthier in 2014 than it is today" come true?
https://twitter.com/Torcuil/status/825379999712735234
(my Latin's awful, so please feel free to rip the above to shreds).
There is some similarity.
Therefore, when we invoke article 50, Euratom is one of the agencies that we automagically leave. As you say, May hasn't suddenly run amok and decided that nukes are evil.
Theresa May's response that America has it's policy and UK has ours is the only response most every leader would give.
But those on the left will continue with their fury but I am not sure it will take them far
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/08/year-nicola-sturgeon-refugees/
Separately, Germany and France are also continuing to work on creating a joint tactical airlift pool of Lockheed Martin Corp C-130J military transport planes, a spokesman for the German defense ministry said on Saturday.
"This can only worry us, but there are many subjects that worry us, welcoming refugees who flee war and oppression is part of our duty."
The Germans put the boot in:
"The United States is a country where Christian traditions have an important meaning. Loving your neighbor is a major Christian value, and that includes helping people."
Lacerating.
Lets hear Merkel and Hollande stand up and condemn the policy and for Merkel to cancel the recent German order for military planes in protest
Re Ed Miliband, of whom Scott and Paste seems to be the latest fanboi, does he follow every tweet with an awkward rephrasing to make sure people get the stilted sound bite??
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/825385825298944001
A moratorium on new applications, and across a wider range of countries, while drafting new more stringent requirements would be entirely reasonable.
It does seem Trump has torn up the refugee convention. Rather unfair on legitimate refugees, but the existing convention does need extensive revision.
And the equivalence is simple: this idiot's actions was the sort of hatred that allowed Nazism to breed in Germany in the 1930s. And your attitude - a turning of the cheek amongst the moderately sane - aided and abetted it.
A woman was trying to do her job, and she was harassed and assaulted. I bet the fact it happened in an airport won't exactly be a mitigating factor.
It's the best I could do, and It'll probably send a Latin teacher into fits of rage.
Apple
Google
Facebook
Amazon
Oracle
IBM
Uber
Yahoo
EMC
eBay
AT&T
Tesla
Reddit
And what business is it of the UK PM on US domestic immigration policy?
And yes, I did know roughly what Euratom does. Then again, it's the sort of area I'm interested in.
Hence the abundance of caution.
:-)
Clip of Theresa May says the 'United States is responsible for its policy on refugees, the UK is responsible for its refugees' sounded a good response. No other leader has condemned the US so far.
The Fench and German ministers say it can only 'worry us'
This is going to be a big story but there is no saying that the polarised views will change much
Presumably she'll get in a zinger about Turkey being responsible for Turkey's policy on refugees.
https://twitter.com/Jack_Blanchard_/status/825388056941383680
Leaving that aside it seems a slightly odd point for you to be making.
To be honest, he has.. and he seems just as bad as before
My suggested campaign song for his return:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVzvRsl4rEM