politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Polling Matters / Opinium survey: Public backs Brexit as the r

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Polling Matters / Opinium survey: Public backs Brexit as the right decision by 52% to 39% as opposition softens

New polling this week shows Leave voters are convinced they made the right decision as Remainers stumble on leaderless writes Keiran Pedley

Read the full story here

MikeSmithson

SeanT said:

Sounds like a far right attack on a mosque in Quebec City. There are some ferocious neo-Nazi nutters there.

Not so welcoming after all, M Trudeau.

You sound pleased with that Sean.

nunu

SeanT said:

Sounds like a far right attack on a mosque in Quebec City. There are some ferocious neo-Nazi nutters there.

Not so welcoming after all, M Trudeau.

because french speaking part of canada. English speaking part will be more moderate. Probably.

CarlottaVance

Mrs McTurnip stamping her foot:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-38790544?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

As ever conflating Scotland with the SNP

CarlottaVance

SeanT said:

Sounds like a far right attack on a mosque in Quebec City. There are some ferocious neo-Nazi nutters there.

Not so welcoming after all, M Trudeau.

Sure it wasn't toddlers?

http://www.snopes.com/toddlers-killed-americans-terrorists/

nunu

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

MarqueeMark

That net 14% of Remainers who now think Brexit was the right decision is probably a fair metric of those who were frightened into voting Remain by Project Fear, and now think "nah - what a load of bollocks....we'll be fine".

Overall, the trend towards accepting Brexit is encouraging. It is a gradual process that will never be complete, but it should at least stop those proposing a second referendum ever actually trying to deliver it. Because they know they would now get quite soundly beaten if there was a re-run.

rkrkrk

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

AlsoIndigo

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

surbiton

AlsoIndigo said:

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

I don't think if we had a large influx of refugees, I'd expect them to get employment in FTSE 100 companies. Usually, they do small jobs [ usually problems with language ] and open their own businesses. Their children are different.

Look at the example of Ugandan Asians and the Polish community.

MarqueeMark

CarlottaVance said:

Mrs McTurnip stamping her foot:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-38790544?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

As ever conflating Scotland with the SNP

The Voice of Scotland? No, that's just the irritating Whine of the Midge.

Ally_B

surbiton said:

AlsoIndigo said:

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

I don't think if we had a large influx of refugees, I'd expect them to get employment in FTSE 100 companies. Usually, they do small jobs [ usually problems with language ] and open their own businesses. Their children are different.

Look at the example of Ugandan Asians and the Polish community.

I think the language problem will be a major hurdle for them. When I visited a Northern German city last October there was a Romanian youth beginning on the streets (just like the UK I thought!). He spoke reasonably good English so we chatted for a while and he told me that the local businesses wouldn't give him a job until he could speak German. Perhaps this approach is applied across the whole of Germany?

peter_from_putney

MarqueeMark said:

That net 14% of Remainers who now think Brexit was the right decision is probably a fair metric of those who were frightened into voting Remain by Project Fear, and now think "nah - what a load of bollocks....we'll be fine".

Overall, the trend towards accepting Brexit is encouraging. It is a gradual process that will never be complete, but it should at least stop those proposing a second referendum ever actually trying to deliver it. Because they know they would now get quite soundly beaten if there was a re-run.

Sentiment towards brexit has probably also been helped by increasing support and sympathy from other electorates within the EU, other than their hectoring, bullying politicians that is.

Ally_B

MarqueeMark said:

That net 14% of Remainers who now think Brexit was the right decision is probably a fair metric of those who were frightened into voting Remain by Project Fear, and now think "nah - what a load of bollocks....we'll be fine".

Overall, the trend towards accepting Brexit is encouraging. It is a gradual process that will never be complete, but it should at least stop those proposing a second referendum ever actually trying to deliver it. Because they know they would now get quite soundly beaten if there was a re-run.

I certainly agree with your first point. There is, as yet, no evidence to show the 'man in the street' that he has anything to worry from the Brexit vote and as you say they will be thinking "nah - what a load of bollocks". Of course, we who post here are not anything like the 'man in the street'. We can see what the world is looking like becoming in two years time as UK income and social expenditure falls, in part due to to business relocation within the EU and uncertainty delaying investment. So I find myself agreeing with part of your second point, there will never be a second referendum on this because, when the time is right for us to rejoin, it will be Parliament to decide not the people. The gradual process by the 'man in the street' towards acceptance of the consequences of Brexit will be long over before we complete the two year exit process.

CarlottaVance

John Curtice:

Meanwhile, it would seem that supporters of independence themselves may also be coming to the conclusion that Brexit may not provide an opportune moment for a second independence referendum after all. Just 27% of all voters now think that an independence referendum should be held before the UK leaves the EU. That represents a drop of six points since last September and one of no less than 16 points compared with the position immediately after the EU referendum result became known. Even amongst those who voted Yes in September 2014 rather less than half (47%) now think a second independence referendum should be held before the UK leaves the EU.

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2017/01/ms-sturgeons-brexit-difficulties/

JosiasJessop

Ally_B said:

surbiton said:

AlsoIndigo said:

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

I don't think if we had a large influx of refugees, I'd expect them to get employment in FTSE 100 companies. Usually, they do small jobs [ usually problems with language ] and open their own businesses. Their children are different.

Look at the example of Ugandan Asians and the Polish community.

I think the language problem will be a major hurdle for them. When I visited a Northern German city last October there was a Romanian youth beginning on the streets (just like the UK I thought!). He spoke reasonably good English so we chatted for a while and he told me that the local businesses wouldn't give him a job until he could speak German. Perhaps this approach is applied across the whole of Germany?

A friend works in Germany in a highly technical job for a large, well-known German-based company. He started there after being seconded from the UK on a temporary basis. He learnt basic German very quickly, and then accepted a full-time role over there.

However, he could not get promotion until he passed a certain language qualification that required a heck of a lot of study.

So anecdotally it appears to happen in large companies as well.

Dura_Ace

JosiasJessop said:

Ally_B said:

surbiton said:

AlsoIndigo said:

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

I don't think if we had a large influx of refugees, I'd expect them to get employment in FTSE 100 companies. Usually, they do small jobs [ usually problems with language ] and open their own businesses. Their children are different.

Look at the example of Ugandan Asians and the Polish community.

I think the language problem will be a major hurdle for them. When I visited a Northern German city last October there was a Romanian youth beginning on the streets (just like the UK I thought!). He spoke reasonably good English so we chatted for a while and he told me that the local businesses wouldn't give him a job until he could speak German. Perhaps this approach is applied across the whole of Germany?

A friend works in Germany in a highly technical job for a large, well-known German-based company. He started there after being seconded from the UK on a temporary basis. He learnt basic German very quickly, and then accepted a full-time role over there.

However, he could not get promotion until he passed a certain language qualification that required a heck of a lot of study.

So anecdotally it appears to happen in large companies as well.

You won't get any job in a big German company (other than mopping up piss in die Urinflasche) unless your facility with the German language is at least CEFR B2.

JosiasJessop

Dura_Ace said:

JosiasJessop said:

Ally_B said:

surbiton said:

AlsoIndigo said:

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

I don't think if we had a large influx of refugees, I'd expect them to get employment in FTSE 100 companies. Usually, they do small jobs [ usually problems with language ] and open their own businesses. Their children are different.

Look at the example of Ugandan Asians and the Polish community.

I think the language problem will be a major hurdle for them. When I visited a Northern German city last October there was a Romanian youth beginning on the streets (just like the UK I thought!). He spoke reasonably good English so we chatted for a while and he told me that the local businesses wouldn't give him a job until he could speak German. Perhaps this approach is applied across the whole of Germany?

A friend works in Germany in a highly technical job for a large, well-known German-based company. He started there after being seconded from the UK on a temporary basis. He learnt basic German very quickly, and then accepted a full-time role over there.

However, he could not get promotion until he passed a certain language qualification that required a heck of a lot of study.

So anecdotally it appears to happen in large companies as well.

You won't get any job in a big German company (other than mopping up piss in die Urinflasche) unless your facility with the German language is at least CEFR B2.

Thanks. I think that was it.

Casino_Royale

I presume it's 60% of current Labour voters who think it was the wrong decision?

If it's off a base level of support of 24-27% in the polls then that does beg the question where the rest of the Labour base went after the referendum, and were those that have since left disproportionately Leavers?

Prior to it, Labour were quite consistently polling 30-32%

MJW

I think the point about leadership hits the nail on the head. In his lengthy blog post outlining the insurance and outside of the Leave campaign Cummings wrote that without Boris and Gove they'd have been dead in the water. The problem for all those opposed to May's form of Brexit is that the tables have turned and with Corbyn squatting athe the top of the Labour Party with no understanding of the issue, no one has the platform to make the rational and plausible case against, which is that leaving the SM, far from taking back control will leave our economy at the mercy of people like Trump, as well as the goodwill of an EU that increasingly sees itself as a sole beacon of European liberalism in opposition to goings on in Britain and America. You may strongly disagree with that, but the point is it's not being made and as a result people, who tend not to worry themselves about the intricacies until they either happen or are plausibly and simply pointed out, gravitate to the default of a government they may not like or fully trust, but who at least seem to have a plan.

MaxPB

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

not_on_fire

radsatser said:

@ Ally_B

"Of course, we who post here are not anything like the 'man in the street'. We can see what the world is looking like becoming in two years time as UK income and social expenditure falls, in part due to to business relocation within the EU and uncertainty delaying investment."

Not sure if this was tongue in cheek, or shear bloody arrogance

Evidence to date would suggest that 'the man in the street' or the wisdom of the crowd have considerable more clarity in their thinking and analysis, than any random slack handful of self appointed experts whose greatest skill appears to be using the benefit of hindsight to dump or modify their 'expert' theories the minute they go tit's up.

What utter nonsense. Trump is the embodiment of "man in the street" thinking - crude, simplistic solutions to complex problems. We're already starting to see the problems with that approach.

felix

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

Roger

Ally_B said:

MarqueeMark said:

That net 14% of Remainers who now think Brexit was the right decision is probably a fair metric of those who were frightened into voting Remain by Project Fear, and now think "nah - what a load of bollocks....we'll be fine".

Overall, the trend towards accepting Brexit is encouraging. It is a gradual process that will never be complete, but it should at least stop those proposing a second referendum ever actually trying to deliver it. Because they know they would now get quite soundly beaten if there was a re-run.

I certainly agree with your first point. There is, as yet, no evidence to show the 'man in the street' that he has anything to worry from the Brexit vote and as you say they will be thinking "nah - what a load of bollocks". Of course, we who post here are not anything like the 'man in the street'. We can see what the world is looking like becoming in two years time as UK income and social expenditure falls, in part due to to business relocation within the EU and uncertainty delaying investment. So I find myself agreeing with part of your second point, there will never be a second referendum on this because, when the time is right for us to rejoin, it will be Parliament to decide not the people. The gradual process by the 'man in the street' towards acceptance of the consequences of Brexit will be long over before we complete the two year exit process.

Almost the same figures as Iraq. Two years later you couldn't find anyone who had supported the invasion except Tony Blair. As soon as the wheels fall off Brexit as is bound to happen (whether as a consequence or by coincidence) You won't find a LEAVER for dust.

The other consequence of Iraq was that it made Charlie Kennedy and the Libs the most popular show in town which led indirectly to the 2010 coalition.

NB. I notice this poll is two weeks old which means it was done before Trump showed himself to be a nutter. I suspect the there would be a significant difference if it was carried out today. This is stage one of the wheels coming off

felix

radsatser said:

@ Ally_B

"Of course, we who post here are not anything like the 'man in the street'. We can see what the world is looking like becoming in two years time as UK income and social expenditure falls, in part due to to business relocation within the EU and uncertainty delaying investment."

Not sure if this was tongue in cheek, or shear bloody arrogance

Evidence to date would suggest that 'the man in the street' or the wisdom of the crowd have considerable more clarity in their thinking and analysis, than any random slack handful of self appointed experts whose greatest skill appears to be using the benefit of hindsight to dump or modify their 'expert' theories the minute they go tit's up.

I was unsure whether it was sarcasm or real and gave it the BOD as he;s not one of the 'usual suspects' like roger or surbiton

Roger

Let's hope the perpetrators weren't American or Christian

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-mosque-shooting-idUSKBN15E04S

CarlottaVance

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

Surely BREXIT and EU membership is the casus belli of SINDYREF2?

Dura_Ace

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

OldKingCole

One reason for this is, perhaps, that we haven’t actually left yet. As others have suggested it’s something which has now been passed to the political classes, while the man in the steeet is more concerned with, I suggest, the NHS or sorting out out his or her next holiday, and I do hear the odd grumble about the rising cost thereof.

Essexit

MarqueeMark said:

That net 14% of Remainers who now think Brexit was the right decision is probably a fair metric of those who were frightened into voting Remain by Project Fear, and now think "nah - what a load of bollocks....we'll be fine".

Overall, the trend towards accepting Brexit is encouraging. It is a gradual process that will never be complete, but it should at least stop those proposing a second referendum ever actually trying to deliver it. Because they know they would now get quite soundly beaten if there was a re-run.

I have to reluctantly hand it to the Remain campaign on this one - their messaging was successful at getting a lot of people tempted to vote Leave to vote Remain out of fear. Nearly enough to get them over the line.

The problem is the wheels are rapidly falling off their support as Project Fear is tested against reality.

Dura_Ace

OldKingCole said:

One reason for this is, perhaps, that we haven’t actually left yet. As others have suggested it’s something which has now been passed to the political classes, while the man in the steeet is more concerned with, I suggest, the NHS or sorting out out his or her next holiday, and I do hear the odd grumble about the rising cost thereof.

I know a few Leave voters who think we've already left and that it's all over with bar the forced deportations.

Casino_Royale

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

It should be the most vulnerable and those most in need of refuge.

Women and children, and old men, would be higher. Young, fit men near the bottom.

There is an informal prioritisation amongst those who are 'right on': gay Muslim men will be very near the top, with minority Christians somewhere near the bottom.

Whomever is at Calais at the front of the queue.

JosiasJessop

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

Casino_Royale

MJW said:

I think the point about leadership hits the nail on the head. In his lengthy blog post outlining the insurance and outside of the Leave campaign Cummings wrote that without Boris and Gove they'd have been dead in the water. The problem for all those opposed to May's form of Brexit is that the tables have turned and with Corbyn squatting athe the top of the Labour Party with no understanding of the issue, no one has the platform to make the rational and plausible case against, which is that leaving the SM, far from taking back control will leave our economy at the mercy of people like Trump, as well as the goodwill of an EU that increasingly sees itself as a sole beacon of European liberalism in opposition to goings on in Britain and America. You may strongly disagree with that, but the point is it's not being made and as a result people, who tend not to worry themselves about the intricacies until they either happen or are plausibly and simply pointed out, gravitate to the default of a government they may not like or fully trust, but who at least seem to have a plan.

Cummings was Gove's man. So was Victoria Woodcock known to him. Without Gove declaring there'd have been no Boris declaration.

Gove changed history.

TheScreamingEagles

Ho ho ho.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/825973253525143553

MaxPB

TheScreamingEagles said:

Ho ho ho.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/825973253525143553

If she had been reading PB the SNP would never have turned Indyref2 into EU vs UK in the first place. Amateur hour from Nicola to let it get there

John_M

Good morning all.

I'm a believer in the J curve, but lets handwave that away for a moment. Recall the IFS forecast for UK GDP in 2030, it estimated (based on the NIESR model) a mid point of ~6% shortfall. Pretending that this is applied linearly, that's a reduction of ~0.4% p.a. in trend growth. I doubt most ordinary people would notice.

In practice, my view is we're highly likely to have a recession at some point between now and 2020, which will be exacerbated by the factors mentioned down thread. That's the point at which the wheels may come off the Brexit bus for the man in the street.

Having said all that, the idea that any economic model's predictions have value 14 years out stretches my credulity beyond breaking point. But it's the best we have to work with *shrug*.

AlsoIndigo

not_on_fire said:

radsatser said:

@ Ally_B

"Of course, we who post here are not anything like the 'man in the street'. We can see what the world is looking like becoming in two years time as UK income and social expenditure falls, in part due to to business relocation within the EU and uncertainty delaying investment."

Not sure if this was tongue in cheek, or shear bloody arrogance

Evidence to date would suggest that 'the man in the street' or the wisdom of the crowd have considerable more clarity in their thinking and analysis, than any random slack handful of self appointed experts whose greatest skill appears to be using the benefit of hindsight to dump or modify their 'expert' theories the minute they go tit's up.

What utter nonsense. Trump is the embodiment of "man in the street" thinking - crude, simplistic solutions to complex problems. We're already starting to see the problems with that approach.

This democracy thing is a bugger isnt it ?

Casino_Royale

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

Casino_Royale

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

My view is the SCon may do very well, but they have a ceiling. I couldn't see them above 30% even in their wildest dreams.

If Ruth Davidson were ever to be First Minister she'd need to do so as a minority with unreliable Labour or LD support, which might never happen unless the SNP become truly despised.

TheScreamingEagles

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

AlsoIndigo

John_M said:

In practice, my view is we're highly likely to have a recession at some point between now and 2020, which will be exacerbated by the factors mentioned down thread. That's the point at which the wheels may come off the Brexit bus for the man in the street.

I suspect for the man in the street, and especially the man in the white van that voted Leave, it won't be BrExit that carries that can, it will be politicians, possibly May & Co, but more likely Junker et al, for fecking up the implementation. The people that will blame BrExit will be people that voted Remain anyway, its not going to shift many votes either way.

matt

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

Maybe but, as far as I'm aware, one rarely has nationalist/separatist parties who reach power like the SNP has done. The PQ/BQ managed it but ultimately foundered on losing referendums (and economic problems as Canadian business relocated to Ontario). The ANC continues in SA long past its objective sell-by date.

Predicting ultimate demise is probably right but without a specific date it's not a terribly illuminating prediction.

AlsoIndigo

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

ttps://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

The Secretary of Homeland Security found out that the Muslim ban executive order was being signed by watching TV.

Something that happens here as well I suspect, one of the running themes on Yes Minister (a series which has since been shown to have almost documentary accuracy) was that the Foreign Secretary usual found out current Foreign Office policy from watching the news on the TV.

Alistair

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

The Greens will get a big boost, but then I don't see what happens to others as the Greens turns off as many as it will attract. Labour and the Lib Dems poisoned the well for attracting Pro-Indy supporters in 2014. They can of course attract No-Remain voting SNP voters but that still leaves a big rump of support with no where to go.

Alistair

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

The Sturgeon Red Line is Single Market Access not EU membership so in a way this is no surprise. However, I am very surprised. That said I haven't read the full article so maybe there is more/less subtlety in it.

alex.

AlsoIndigo said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

ttps://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

The Secretary of Homeland Security found out that the Muslim ban executive order was being signed by watching TV.

Something that happens here as well I suspect, one of the running themes on Yes Minister (a series which has since been shown to have almost documentary accuracy) was that the Foreign Secretary usual found out current Foreign Office policy from watching the news on the TV.

No the theme was that the Foreign Office found out what was going on in the World by watching the news. Not found out foreign policy.

John_M

AlsoIndigo said:

John_M said:

In practice, my view is we're highly likely to have a recession at some point between now and 2020, which will be exacerbated by the factors mentioned down thread. That's the point at which the wheels may come off the Brexit bus for the man in the street.

I suspect for the man in the street, and especially the man in the white van that voted Leave, it won't be BrExit that carries that can, it will be politicians, possibly May & Co, but more likely Junker et al, for fecking up the implementation. The people that will blame BrExit will be people that voted Remain anyway, its not going to shift many votes either way.

On that we agree. Were I a Remain voting Tory, who would I switch to? The Lib Dems? Other than their 'EU uber alles' position, I have no idea what they stand for.

foxinsoxuk

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

Surely it requires half the cabinet of cronies and the VP to agree? not going to happen any time soon.

I think Sturgeon is actually playing her game very well. She is going to wind up with a very Devo-max outcome, albeit outside the EU. The price of staying within the Union will be much greater Scottish control of policy, including trade and migration policy.

TOPPING

John_M said:

Good morning all.

I'm a believer in the J curve, but lets handwave that away for a moment. Recall the IFS forecast for UK GDP in 2030, it estimated (based on the NIESR model) a mid point of ~6% shortfall. Pretending that this is applied linearly, that's a reduction of ~0.4% p.a. in trend growth. I doubt most ordinary people would notice.

In practice, my view is we're highly likely to have a recession at some point between now and 2020, which will be exacerbated by the factors mentioned down thread. That's the point at which the wheels may come off the Brexit bus for the man in the street.

Having said all that, the idea that any economic model's predictions have value 14 years out stretches my credulity beyond breaking point. But it's the best we have to work with *shrug*.

It's Teresa's hedge against a bad or indeed any EU deal.

It will all be blamed on that.

david_herdson

foxinsoxuk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

Surely it requires half the cabinet of cronies and the VP to agree? not going to happen any time soon.

I think Sturgeon is actually playing her game very well. She is going to wind up with a very Devo-max outcome, albeit outside the EU. The price of staying within the Union will be much greater Scottish control of policy, including trade and migration policy.

How does she get to control either? They are UK issues and logically, have to be. You could argue that 'greater Scottish control' could mean more ability to influence UK policy but if so, it's a tough case to argue given the current direction of travel.

MaxPB

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

The Sturgeon Red Line is Single Market Access not EU membership so in a way this is no surprise. However, I am very surprised. That said I haven't read the full article so maybe there is more/less subtlety in it.

It's exactly that, EEA membership, Norwegian model. I think it's too late for that though.

rural_voter

Alistair said:

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

The Greens will get a big boost, but then I don't see what happens to others as the Greens turns off as many as it will attract. Labour and the Lib Dems poisoned the well for attracting Pro-Indy supporters in 2014. They can of course attract No-Remain voting SNP voters but that still leaves a big rump of support with no where to go.

Wasn't the SDP in Sweden in power from 1932 to 1976?

PlatoSaid

Oops for Daily Beast

Mark Dice
Hey @JohnAvlon your paper published "names" of the Quebec City mosque shooters they found on a parody Reuters account! Bravo. #FakeNews

No confirmation of names that I've seen so far - and conflicting reports of what happened inc that Ally Snack Bar was shouted/dispute between rival factions.

glw

John_M said:

Having said all that, the idea that any economic model's predictions have value 14 years out stretches my credulity beyond breaking point. But it's the best we have to work with *shrug*.

I will start taking long range economic forecasts seriously when the people that make them demonstrate their time machine.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Astute observation that the Remain campaign has no leader. In related news, Sturgeon asks for a moon on the stick, and is miffed when she's told it's not likely to happen:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38793370

malcolmg

CarlottaVance said:

Mrs McTurnip stamping her foot:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-38790544?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_politics&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

As ever conflating Scotland with the SNP

You not yet realised that unlike England where minority party rules, SNP have the majority of the support.

Jonathan

For the future of Scottish politics look at Canada. Eventually you can recover from a wipeout. Takes about 10-15 years.

malcolmg

AlsoIndigo said:

rkrkrk said:

nunu said:

There is a more sensible way forward on the Muslim ban- only allow in refugees who are women and children and elderly. Not young men.

Splitting up families and ensuring we miss out on economically productive young men is not a good idea.

Wasnt the experience in Germany that most of the young men from those parts of the world were in fact not economically productive ?

Edit:

And a grand total of 54 refugees have managed to find employment with the country's biggest 30 companies, according to a survey in June by the daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Fifty of them are employed by Deutsche Post.

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/28/489510068/despite-early-optimism-german-companies-hire-few-refugees

Exactly , you import the crime and fork out more benefits. A good idea might be for them to put some effort into our local non productive people having to get employment rather than paying them large benefits and importing more.

SouthamObserver

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

david_herdson

Alistair said:

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

The Greens will get a big boost, but then I don't see what happens to others as the Greens turns off as many as it will attract. Labour and the Lib Dems poisoned the well for attracting Pro-Indy supporters in 2014. They can of course attract No-Remain voting SNP voters but that still leaves a big rump of support with no where to go.

A thought experiment.

The Tories win the 2020 general election with a working majority of 50 after going into it with an economy on a downturn after Brexit is executed in March 2019. Corbyn has been replaced by Starmer but Labour remains in turmoil as the PLP refuse to nominate anyone from the left. Scottish Labour remains floundering for a purpose; the Lib Dems have recovered to 20 seats in the Commons after flattering to deceive in by-elections. The shine has come off the SNP a little after domestic difficulties in administration and the odd scandal, and Davidson has capitalised in making the Scottish Tories the clear (and ideologically unthreatening) opposition. The 2021 Scottish election results are.

SNP 51
Con 34
Lab 22
LD 12
Green 10

What does Labour do?

malcolmg

CarlottaVance said:

John Curtice:

Meanwhile, it would seem that supporters of independence themselves may also be coming to the conclusion that Brexit may not provide an opportune moment for a second independence referendum after all. Just 27% of all voters now think that an independence referendum should be held before the UK leaves the EU. That represents a drop of six points since last September and one of no less than 16 points compared with the position immediately after the EU referendum result became known. Even amongst those who voted Yes in September 2014 rather less than half (47%) now think a second independence referendum should be held before the UK leaves the EU.

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2017/01/ms-sturgeons-brexit-difficulties/

Ha Ha Ha , the musings of one misguided Labour supporter. I smell fear from unionists.

malcolmg

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

The Times , organ of the SNP for sure.

SouthamObserver

Jonathan said:

For the future of Scottish politics look at Canada. Eventually you can recover from a wipeout. Takes about 10-15 years.

Labour will be in power in Scotland within five years of independence. The SNP started the last referendum campaign with opinion poll support for separation in the 30s. They will start the next one with it in the mid-40s. The current arrangement cannot endure as England and Scotland move ever-further apart. At some point, the economic case for staying will become secondary. See England and the EU.

Morris_Dancer

Just a little way in (10 mins) but liking Suzy Dean so far.

malcolmg

not_on_fire said:

radsatser said:

@ Ally_B

"Of course, we who post here are not anything like the 'man in the street'. We can see what the world is looking like becoming in two years time as UK income and social expenditure falls, in part due to to business relocation within the EU and uncertainty delaying investment."

Not sure if this was tongue in cheek, or shear bloody arrogance

Evidence to date would suggest that 'the man in the street' or the wisdom of the crowd have considerable more clarity in their thinking and analysis, than any random slack handful of self appointed experts whose greatest skill appears to be using the benefit of hindsight to dump or modify their 'expert' theories the minute they go tit's up.

What utter nonsense. Trump is the embodiment of "man in the street" thinking - crude, simplistic solutions to complex problems. We're already starting to see the problems with that approach.

Is it any worse than the usual snakeoil salesmen politicians, with the do nothing but fill my pockets strategy and just ignore the plebs.

malcolmg

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

That would be very stupid , but it is the Times suggesting it so no surprise.

HYUFD

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

malcolmg

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

Ha Ha, the life of a Unionist donkey in full view.

malcolmg

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

You can be certain it will not be the Tories

SouthamObserver

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.

malcolmg

MaxPB said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Ho ho ho.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/825973253525143553

If she had been reading PB the SNP would never have turned Indyref2 into EU vs UK in the first place. Amateur hour from Nicola to let it get there

I think it is more the stupidity of the frothers on here , you know who you are, who actually believe they are clever and know the first thing about it.

JosiasJessop

matt said:

Maybe but, as far as I'm aware, one rarely has nationalist/separatist parties who reach power like the SNP has done. The PQ/BQ managed it but ultimately foundered on losing referendums (and economic problems as Canadian business relocated to Ontario). The ANC continues in SA long past its objective sell-by date.

Predicting ultimate demise is probably right but without a specific date it's not a terribly illuminating prediction.

When I was writing that post, I was thinking of 10-20 years for three reasons:

*) Past record. Both the Thatcher/Major and Blair/Brown governments lasted for around this sort of period (T/M 18, B/B 13).

*) There is time for their record to become jaded, without being able to fully blame the previous government. Although the SNP may have some cover by continuing to blame Westminster. Basically, they have to start taking responsibility.

*) Change in politicians. Politicians can remain in politics for decades; but few people last at the very top for more than ten years or so - even Salmond stepped down from party leader a couple of times, each of which as a ten-year stint. It chews people up. There are exceptions: Angela Merkel being one. But as the generation that was in opposition retires or return to the backbenches, they are replaced with new people, who have often only known government. They often lack hunger or even basic competence. I almost think parties need time in opposition in which to renew their ideas and vigour.

For these reasons, I expect the Conservative government to start having real problems in the 2020-2025 parliament (Labour's AC epoch, or After Corbyn). The SNP majority government started in 2011; I expect them to start having serious troubles in the same timeframe.

(I count the 2010-15 coalition government for the Conservatives, but not the 2007-11 coalition for the SNP, because of the widespread perception that the 2010-15 government *was* a Conservative government, and the fact that the Labour-SNP government contained the SNP's main enemy. Others may differ.)

JosiasJessop

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

You can be certain it will not be the Tories

People were 'certain' there wold never be an SNP majority government. One of the certainties in western politics is that old certainties become uncertain.

malcolmg

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

She was only pitching that as teh minimum UK had to go for , whilst knowing that there was zero chance of UK ever getting it. If it is hard brexit and she does not go for referendum she is stuffed , so all this mince by Times and know it alls on here is just rubbish.

Morris_Dancer

Mildly amused Mr. Pedley just asked "How big a problem is sexism in the UK?" then followed it up with "How big a challenge do women face for equality in the UK?"

Sexism does cut both ways, (cf suicide stats, custody battles, court sentences, domestic violence funding etc).

malcolmg

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

My view is the SCon may do very well, but they have a ceiling. I couldn't see them above 30% even in their wildest dreams.

If Ruth Davidson were ever to be First Minister she'd need to do so as a minority with unreliable Labour or LD support, which might never happen unless the SNP become truly despised.

They will never be government of Scotland , EVER.

Essexit

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.

I'm not an expert negotiator but am confused as to why we'd try to get something we don't want.

malcolmg

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

The Sturgeon Red Line is Single Market Access not EU membership so in a way this is no surprise. However, I am very surprised. That said I haven't read the full article so maybe there is more/less subtlety in it.

It is the London Times , it will be horse manure by some dithering unionist halfwit.

malcolmg

david_herdson said:

foxinsoxuk said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

Surely it requires half the cabinet of cronies and the VP to agree? not going to happen any time soon.

I think Sturgeon is actually playing her game very well. She is going to wind up with a very Devo-max outcome, albeit outside the EU. The price of staying within the Union will be much greater Scottish control of policy, including trade and migration policy.

How does she get to control either? They are UK issues and logically, have to be. You could argue that 'greater Scottish control' could mean more ability to influence UK policy but if so, it's a tough case to argue given the current direction of travel.

Especially given the known perfidy of Tories and Labour , they have lied on topic forever.

[Deleted User]

malcolmg said:

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

She was only pitching that as teh minimum UK had to go for , whilst knowing that there was zero chance of UK ever getting it. If it is hard brexit and she does not go for referendum she is stuffed , so all this mince by Times and know it alls on here is just rubbish.

But if it is hard Brexit, then Yes will lose. Badly. England is by a huge margin Scotland's most important export market and you'd be on the wrong side of the EU/UK border. Independence hopes will be gone for a generation.

John_M

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

It's not about access tot he single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.

As single market membership is so desirable, there are two explanations for that. One, Mrs May is secretly an Ultra (I doubt that), or, based on sidebar discussions with the various counterparties, we know that FoM really is an EU red line.

I know you're a self-confessed worrywart, but I do think you're mischaracterising the UK position. It's pointless opening with demands that will simply be rejected out of hand. That's just a basic tenet of negotiation.

Ultimately, its out of our hands (in the sense of any PB poster having any influence over the outcome). Worrying about things that are outwith our control is a recipe for an unhappy life. Here endeth the sermon.

Fysics_Teacher

AlsoIndigo said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

‪Section IV of the XXV Amendment is all I'm saying. ‬

ttps://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/825968324433555456

The Secretary of Homeland Security found out that the Muslim ban executive order was being signed by watching TV.

Something that happens here as well I suspect, one of the running themes on Yes Minister (a series which has since been shown to have almost documentary accuracy) was that the Foreign Secretary usual found out current Foreign Office policy from watching the news on the TV.

Yes Minister would be fine: I'm worried it's more 'The Thick of It'.

HYUFD

Panelbase Scotland indyref2 poll

No 54% Yes 46%

https://mobile.twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/825986372330782720

MonikerDiCanio

malcolmg said:

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

The Sturgeon Red Line is Single Market Access not EU membership so in a way this is no surprise. However, I am very surprised. That said I haven't read the full article so maybe there is more/less subtlety in it.

It is the London Times , it will be horse manure by some dithering unionist halfwit.

malcolmg said:

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

The Sturgeon Red Line is Single Market Access not EU membership so in a way this is no surprise. However, I am very surprised. That said I haven't read the full article so maybe there is more/less subtlety in it.

It is the London Times , it will be horse manure by some dithering unionist halfwit.

Wrong side of the bed this morning ?

Scott_P

So this is what "control" and "Sovereignty" looks like

https://twitter.com/bbcbreaking/status/825969421193715713

Scott_P

@seanjonesqc: May on Brexit: Ignore the economics, focus on immigration.

May on Trump: Ignore the immigration, focus on the economics.

not_on_fire

Essexit said:

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.

I'm not an expert negotiator but am confused as to why we'd try to get something we don't want.

Most people do want it. They just want to believe they have control over immigration more.

SouthamObserver

Essexit said:

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.

I'm not an expert negotiator but am confused as to why we'd try to get something we don't want.

Exactly - Tory hard Brexit has always been predicated on completely severing our membership of the Single Market.

malcolmg

david_herdson said:

Alistair said:

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

The Greens will get a big boost, but then I don't see what happens to others as the Greens turns off as many as it will attract. Labour and the Lib Dems poisoned the well for attracting Pro-Indy supporters in 2014. They can of course attract No-Remain voting SNP voters but that still leaves a big rump of support with no where to go.

A thought experiment.

The Tories win the 2020 general election with a working majority of 50 after going into it with an economy on a downturn after Brexit is executed in March 2019. Corbyn has been replaced by Starmer but Labour remains in turmoil as the PLP refuse to nominate anyone from the left. Scottish Labour remains floundering for a purpose; the Lib Dems have recovered to 20 seats in the Commons after flattering to deceive in by-elections. The shine has come off the SNP a little after domestic difficulties in administration and the odd scandal, and Davidson has capitalised in making the Scottish Tories the clear (and ideologically unthreatening) opposition. The 2021 Scottish election results are.

SNP 51
Con 34
Lab 22
LD 12
Green 10

What does Labour do?

What they usually do they will go with the Tories.

chestnut

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

Better to keep 44% than 28% (the latest YG split of EuroSindys)

Morris_Dancer

Twenty-two minutes in. Getting feisty.

JosiasJessop

Morris_Dancer said:

Mildly amused Mr. Pedley just asked "How big a problem is sexism in the UK?" then followed it up with "How big a challenge do women face for equality in the UK?"

Sexism does cut both ways, (cf suicide stats, custody battles, court sentences, domestic violence funding etc).

Indeed. But I have no problem in areas that women are disadvantaged being addressed, as long as the same is true for areas where men are disadvantaged.

It's one of the difference between (some) forms of feminism and true equality.

SquareRoot

malcolmg said:

Casino_Royale said:

JosiasJessop said:

Dura_Ace said:

felix said:

MaxPB said:

The Times saying that the SNP are set to drop EU membership in order to retain "Yes/Leave" voters that made up around a third of all Yes voters in 2014.

If they had been reading PB they'd have not walked into this stupid mistake in the first place.

Surely if Nicola does that she could split her party.

I've got to say that of all the political downfalls that I'm trying to live long enough to see it's the notion of the sun setting on The Sturgeon Project that gives me a semi.

The SNP have been doing a good job of consolidating their gains, using a mixture of surface competence, blame-shifting and jingoism depending on the market.

However no party remains in power forever, and eventually the shine will come off their government. This should not be a controversial point - in the west it's hard for a democratic government to remain in power for decades. Nor is it healthy for them to do so.

The question for me is who will benefit: will Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems, or Scottish Conservatives pick up the pieces when the SNP fall from grace? A decade ago Labour would have been the only answer; but now?

My view is the SCon may do very well, but they have a ceiling. I couldn't see them above 30% even in their wildest dreams.

If Ruth Davidson were ever to be First Minister she'd need to do so as a minority with unreliable Labour or LD support, which might never happen unless the SNP become truly despised.

They will never be government of Scotland , EVER.

thats what Labour used to say about the SNP.

AndyJS

Strong correlation between areas that voted Remain and the places where people are signing the e-petition:

http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=171928

malcolmg

Patrick said:

malcolmg said:

Casino_Royale said:

Is the SNP move any surprise?

Thought she'd been pitching for EEA-EFTA for a long time.

She was only pitching that as teh minimum UK had to go for , whilst knowing that there was zero chance of UK ever getting it. If it is hard brexit and she does not go for referendum she is stuffed , so all this mince by Times and know it alls on here is just rubbish.

But if it is hard Brexit, then Yes will lose. Badly. England is by a huge margin Scotland's most important export market and you'd be on the wrong side of the EU/UK border. Independence hopes will be gone for a generation.

Would be brave to bet on that Patrick , it is on a knife edge and much better chance of YES this time I reckon. People know they were stiffed last time and many will not be taken in by the lies again.

HYUFD

SouthamObserver said:

HYUFD said:

SouthamObserver said:

The Remain campaign does have a leader. he is called Tim Farron. But he is not really big box office.

Given that nothing has happened, it's not a surprise that most people think the right decision was made. I think the wrong decision was made, but also believe it would now be totally counter-productive to remain an EU member state. What matters is getting as close to what we have now in terms of the Single Market as is practicably possible. For ideological reasons to do with May wanting to keep the Tory right on side that is not going to happen. For a credible opposition that would be an ongoing gift - especially with the government having made the decision to walk hand-in-hand with the unstable liar now in charge at the White House. But we do not have a credible opposition, so hard Brexit it will be.

The Iraq invasion attracted huge protests, but turned out to be very popular until things started to go wrong.

Blair was re elected in 2005 2 years after the Iraq invasion however given control of free movement was such a key part of the Leave platform and the EU refuse to allow that and full single market membership, full access to the single market was never really on the cards after a Leave vote

It's not about access to the single market, it's about membership. We have given up trying to get anything on that front before the negotiations even started.

As the EU have refused to compromise on it at all before negotiations have even started, at most May will get Swiss style bilateral agreements in a few sectors, if she tries any free movement control single market membership is off the table

Essexit

Scott_P said:

So this is what "control" and "Sovereignty" looks like

https://twitter.com/bbcbreaking/status/825969421193715713

Scott, not everything is to do with how terrible you think Brexit is.

not_on_fire

AndyJS said:

Strong correlation between areas that voted Remain and the places where people are signing the e-petition:

http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=171928

Does that somehow invalidate it?

malcolmg

JosiasJessop said:

matt said:

Maybe but, as far as I'm aware, one rarely has nationalist/separatist parties who reach power like the SNP has done. The PQ/BQ managed it but ultimately foundered on losing referendums (and economic problems as Canadian business relocated to Ontario). The ANC continues in SA long past its objective sell-by date.

Predicting ultimate demise is probably right but without a specific date it's not a terribly illuminating prediction.

When I was writing that post, I was thinking of 10-20 years for three reasons:

*) Past record. Both the Thatcher/Major and Blair/Brown governments lasted for around this sort of period (T/M 18, B/B 13).

*) There is time for their record to become jaded, without being able to fully blame the previous government. Although the SNP may have some cover by continuing to blame Westminster. Basically, they have to start taking responsibility.

*) Change in politicians. Politicians can remain in politics for decades; but few people last at the very top for more than ten years or so - even Salmond stepped down from party leader a couple of times, each of which as a ten-year stint. It chews people up. There are exceptions: Angela Merkel being one. But as the generation that was in opposition retires or return to the backbenches, they are replaced with new people, who have often only known government. They often lack hunger or even basic competence. I almost think parties need time in opposition in which to renew their ideas and vigour.

For these reasons, I expect the Conservative government to start having real problems in the 2020-2025 parliament (Labour's AC epoch, or After Corbyn). The SNP majority government started in 2011; I expect them to start having serious troubles in the same timeframe.

(I count the 2010-15 coalition government for the Conservatives, but not the 2007-11 coalition for the SNP, because of the widespread perception that the 2010-15 government *was* a Conservative government, and the fact that the Labour-SNP government contained the SNP's main enemy. Others may differ.)

Some major errors there.
There was no coalition in 2007 , SNP governed alone with a minority
As long as there are Tory governments in London shafting Scotland and holding all the real powers , it is hard to blame it all on SNP. You can only blame them for the 10% of powers they have and even then inisolation using them is dangerous as planned by unionists.

Slackbladder

I see the Remoaners and now saying 'because Trump is awful, we need to not leave the EU'.

F**king shameless.