Which is imaginative, but what Single-Source Oakeshott forgets is that in fact Vote Leave published a Brexit framework (what you or I would call a manifesto) which unambiguously built in a bill for giving additional funding for the NHS:
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
He did that but, as us people in the campaign had no authority to make good on their suggestions, it was not helpful to aid the current situation. He was PM and, aside from a couple of lies, didn't set out what he would do if his side lost.
The right thing to do wild have been not to campaign vociferously for either side, so he, as elected PM, could deal with either result.
I think it is more a case that it should have been a moral imperative of the PM to implement the manifesto of the Leave campaign, what with it (the manifesto) and them (the campaign) having official status and all that.
But I get into some of the most vituperative arguments on here when I point out that there was such a manifesto, and keep being told that it is "up to the government".
Cameron didn't have any moral imperative, as our PM he was entitled to interpret the result however he thought best.
The Remain campaign had the ability to offer concrete assurances of life after either result, but m chose to offer only one side... all Leave could do was offer suggestions. No one should have interpreted what anyone on the Leave side offered as anything else, & people who pretend to misunderstand to make a point just look like silly bad losers
There you go. Up to the government...no one promised anything... But it was an officially-appointed Leave campaign, and the manifesto was produced by them.
Dave is no longer PM. Theresa is. She should have looked at the official campaign and taken her direction from them.
No no, she can do what she likes just like Dave could have.
I'd imagine it is associated with poverty/perceived opportunity - i.e. both the vote and obesity are associated with the same underlying cause
Bingo. Amazing that people won't vote for something that either doesn't benefit them or they feel that it doesn't benefit them, don't these "idiots" know that when voting they are to put aside their own selfish interests and think of the greater good?
I used to be quite dismissive of rounders baseball, then I grew an appreciation of it when Liverpool were taken over by the owners of the Boston Red Sox.
I enjoyed my time at Fenway Park.
Do you think Liverpool should try switching sports?
Perhaps they already have and that's why recent results have been so poor?
Excellent Don. That is my hope as a fervent remoaner that negotiations will prove so tortuous that the Tories will start to split, again, over this and we will end up with another referendum where hopefully facts will overshadow the lies we had the first time round. £300m for the NHS. Bollocks.Immigration slashed. Bollocks.
The latest line from the Leavers is that this was a suggestion not a commitment:
...
National Health Service (Funding Target) Bill. This would require that by the next general election, the NHS receives a £100 million per week real-terms cash transfusion over and above current plans. This will be paid for by savings from the UK’s contributions to the EU budget and other savings from leaving (e.g. we will not pay the billions that the ECJ is ordering us to pay to multinational companies trying to avoid UK taxes)."
Not much of a suggestion about that.
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
The real mistake was the renegotiation. Simply doing that implied that the EU was unacceptable as it stood, and that he would make the difference. All this achieved was muzzling those in favour of our memberaship, allowing those opposed to ask for the impossible, and for him looking daft when he came home with some technical proposals that couldn't be sold.
Completely agree with that. The EU was a source of irritation and a long term concern but pretty far down my list of concerns in 2015. I agreed with almost all of what Cameron had said in his Bloomberg speech and hoped that the EU could be reformed to something closer to the UK's taste.
And then Cameron tried to negotiate some reforms. And it was embarrassing. And made it crystal clear that the bulk of the EU (or at least the bits that count) were completely committed to a path that I for one did not want to go down. It turned me from a very reluctant remainer into a leaver. It destroyed any hope that the EU might in future be a free trade organisation that left its members to get on with except to the extent that this caused market distortions.
Which is imaginative, but what Single-Source Oakeshott forgets is that in fact Vote Leave published a Brexit framework (what you or I would call a manifesto) which unambiguously built in a bill for giving additional funding for the NHS:
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
He did deal with either result.
I thin
But I get into some of the most vituperative arguments on here when I point out that there was such a manifesto, and keep being told that it is "up to the government".
Cameron didn't have any moral imperative, as our PM he was entitled to interpret the result however he thought best.
The Remain campaign had the ability to offer concrete assurances of life after either result, but m chose to offer only one side... all Leave could do was offer suggestions. No one should have interpreted what anyone on the Leave side offered as anything else, & people who pretend to misunderstand to make a point just look like silly bad losers
There you go. Up to the government...no one promised anything... But it was an officially-appointed Leave campaign, and the manifesto was produced by them.
Dave is no longer PM. Theresa is. She should have looked at the official campaign and taken her direction from them.
No no, she can do what she likes just like Dave could have.
She became PM, surveyed the situation, and decided that she would ignore the VLTC manifesto. Who could have complained if she had come in and said: "As you are aware the people of Britain voted on this document [holds up VLTC manifesto] and as your Prime Minister it is now my intention to implement its terms."?
Larkhall is where they paint the kerbstones red, white & blue and routinely smash the green lamps on traffic lights. Correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation, but..
Two days before the attacks, while his mother was in the Netherlands, there were concerns about Bulhan’s behaviour, prompting his father to collect him and take him to a mosque in Camberwell, south London.
The BBC has obtained a more localised breakdown of votes from nearly half of the local authorities which counted EU referendum ballots last June.
This information provides much greater depth and detail in explaining the pattern of how the UK voted. The key findings are: ■The data confirms previous indications that local results were strongly associated with the educational attainment of voters - populations with lower qualifications were significantly more likely to vote Leave. (The data for this analysis comes from one in nine wards) ■The level of education had a higher correlation with the voting pattern than any other major demographic measure from the census ■The age of voters was also important, with older electorates more likely to choose Leave ■Ethnicity was crucial in some places, with ethnic minority areas generally more likely to back Remain. However this varied, and in parts of London some Asian populations were more likely to support Leave ■The combination of education, age and ethnicity accounts for the large majority of the variation in votes between different places ■Across the country and in many council districts we can point out stark contrasts between localities which most favoured Leave or Remain ■There was a broad pattern in several urban areas of deprived, predominantly white, housing estates towards the urban periphery voting Leave, while inner cities with high numbers of ethnic minorities and/or students voted Remain ■Around 270 locations can be identified where the local outcome was in the opposite direction to the broader official counting area, including parts of Scotland which backed Leave and a Cornwall constituency which voted Remain ■Postal voters appear narrowly more likely to have backed Remain than those who voted in a polling station
They keep repeating this flawed metric of education level. We know that now 50% of youngster go to uni where as it was more like 20-30% of those who are now 50+. So was it education level or age, I would suggest age, which as a result skews the education level stat. They are not independent variables.
I don't think it is as high as that - more like 40% today. In the 1970s it was well under 10% who embarked on degree courses.
Which is imaginative, but what Single-Source Oakeshott forgets is that in fact Vote Leave published a Brexit framework (what you or I would call a manifesto) which unambiguously built in a bill for giving additional funding for the NHS:
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
He did deal with either result.
I thin
But I get into some of the most vituperative arguments on here when I point out that there was such a manifesto, and keep being told that it is "up to the government".
Cameron didn't have any moral imperative, as our PM he was entitled to interpret the result however he thought best.
The Remain campaign had the ability to offer concrete assurances of life after either result, but m chose to offer only one side... all Leave could do was offer suggestions. No one should have interpreted what anyone on the Leave side offered as anything else, & people who pretend to misunderstand to make a point just look like silly bad losers
There you go. Up to the government...no one promised anything... But it was an officially-appointed Leave campaign, and the manifesto was produced by them.
Dave is no longer PM. Theresa is. She should have looked at the official campaign and taken her direction from them.
No no, she can do what she likes just like Dave could have.
She became PM, surveyed the situation, and decided that she would ignore the VLTC manifesto. Who could have complained if she had come in and said: "As you are aware the people of Britain voted on this document [holds up VLTC manifesto] and as your Prime Minister it is now my intention to implement its terms."?
I'm sure some would. Doesn't matter, she is PM and can do what she likes. If people don't like it they can out her.
I can't speak for anyone else, but as an ardent leaver I just wanted to win the vote. That's done and what will be, will be.
There are a lot of obvious jokes to make, but there's also potentially something rather deep going on here that would be well worth understanding properly.
Though there is this interesting finding concerning obesity and voting Trump:
It seems that in Trumpland it is the obese states that vote Trump, though in large part it is because the white Americans who are doing so. Whites in ethnically mixed states are more likely to vote Trump.
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
He did deal with either result.
I thin
But I get into some of the most vituperative arguments on here when I point out that there was such a manifesto, and keep being told that it is "up to the government".
Cameron didn't have any moral imperative, as our PM he was entitled to interpret the result however he thought best.
The Remain campaign had the ability to offer concrete assurances of life after either result, but m chose to offer only one side... all Leave could do was offer suggestions. No one should have interpreted what anyone on the Leave side offered as anything else, & people who pretend to misunderstand to make a point just look like silly bad losers
There you go. Up to the government...no one promised anything... But it was an officially-appointed Leave campaign, and the manifesto was produced by them.
Dave is no longer PM. Theresa is. She should have looked at the official campaign and taken her direction from them.
No no, she can do what she likes just like Dave could have.
She became PM, surveyed the situation, and decided that she would ignore the VLTC manifesto. Who could have complained if she had come in and said: "As you are aware the people of Britain voted on this document [holds up VLTC manifesto] and as your Prime Minister it is now my intention to implement its terms."?
I'd dispute your claim that there was a manifesto, but if there was, Theresa May is pretty much following it by wanting to leave the Single Market and Customs Union - it was clear that Take Back Control of money/borders/law/trade requires this - and seeking a bilateral deal. Extra NHS money would probably have to happen anyway with an ageing population. Other bits like cutting VAT on fuel could be done too.
Two days before the attacks, while his mother was in the Netherlands, there were concerns about Bulhan’s behaviour, prompting his father to collect him and take him to a mosque in Camberwell, south London.
There you go. Up to the government...no one promised anything... But it was an officially-appointed Leave campaign, and the manifesto was produced by them.
Dave is no longer PM. Theresa is. She should have looked at the official campaign and taken her direction from them.
You do realise that the courts have ruled that manifestos are meaningless?
Not morally they're not.
If Brown had been guided by the moral imperative of manifestos, we would have got a referendum on Lisbon, and then we wouldn't be here.
Which is imaginative, but what Single-Source Oakeshott forgets is that in fact Vote Leave published a Brexit framework (what you or I would call a manifesto) which unambiguously built in a bill for giving additional funding for the NHS:
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
He did deal with either result.
I thin
But I get into some of the most vituperative arguments on here when I point out that there was such a manifesto, and keep being told that it is "up to the government".
Cameron didn't have any moral imperative, as our PM he was entitled to interpret the result however he thought best.
The Remain campaign had the ability to offer concrete assurances of life after either result, but m chose to offer only one side... all Leave could do was offer suggestions. No one should have interpreted what anyone on the Leave side offered as anything else, & people who pretend to misunderstand to make a point just look like silly bad losers
There you go. Up to the government...no one promised anything... But it was an officially-appointed Leave campaign, and the manifesto was produced by them.
Dave is no longer PM. Theresa is. She should have looked at the official campaign and taken her direction from them.
No no, she can do what she likes just like Dave could have.
She became PM, surveyed the situation, and decided that she would ignore the VLTC manifesto. Who could have complained if she had come in and said: "As you are aware the people of Britain voted on this document [holds up VLTC manifesto] and as your Prime Minister it is now my intention to implement its terms."?
Two days before the attacks, while his mother was in the Netherlands, there were concerns about Bulhan’s behaviour, prompting his father to collect him and take him to a mosque in Camberwell, south London.
Sean Davis We cataloged every major fake news story since Trump's inauguration. It's a depressingly long list. https://t.co/ZYS5N27Qid
16 stories so far in two weeks
"Since at least Donald Trump’s election, our media have been in the grip of an astonishing, self-inflicted crisis. Despite Trump’s constant railing against the American press, there is no greater enemy of the American media than the American media. They did this to themselves.
We are in the midst of an epidemic of fake news. There is no better word to describe it than “epidemic,” insofar as it fits the epidemiological model from the Centers for Disease Control: this phenomenon occurs when “an agent and susceptible hosts are present in adequate numbers, and the agent can be effectively conveyed from a source to the susceptible hosts.
...Whenever you turn on a news station, visit a news website, or check in on a journalist or media personality on Twitter or Facebook, there is an excellent chance you will be exposed to fake news. It is rapidly becoming an accepted part of the way the American media are run."
What no thread on the greatest superbowl? Biased failing media...just because the Trumpian Patriots won.
As a rugby union fan, I just can't do a thread on American football.
All that padding and protection, it makes a worse spectacle than rugby league.
A good starting point might be that Super Bowl LI was American Football's Istanbul 2005 night.
Here's what I said when Atlanta went 28-3 up.
"Game well and truly over."
Indeed, I wasn't going to mention your embarrassment, but you get the award given in 2005 to the Liverpool fan who left at half time to avoid the queues at Instanbul airport.
The markets really are ridiculous aren't they. So Le Pen launches a manifesto based on all the policies she's been banging on about for years, absolutely no surprises, and that sends French bonds up?!
"After Trump’s electoral victory on November 8, rumors began circulating that multiple transgender teenagers had killed themselves in response to the election results. There was no basis to these rumors. Nobody was able to confirm them at the time, and nobody has been able to confirm in the three months since Trump was elected.
Nevertheless, the claim spread far and wide: Guardian writer and editor-at-large of Out Zach Stafford tweeted the rumor, which was retweeted more than 13,000 times before he deleted it. He later posted a tweet explaining why he deleted his original viral tweet; his explanatory tweet was shared a total of seven times. Meanwhile, PinkNews writer Dominic Preston wrote a report on the rumors, which garnered more than 12,000 shares on Facebook...
At Mic, Matthew Rodriguez wrote about the unsubstantiated allegations. His article was shared more than 55,000 times on Facebook. Urban legend debunker website Snopes wrote a report on the rumors and listed them as “unconfirmed” (rather than “false”). Snopes’s sources were two Facebook posts, since deleted, that offered no helpful information regarding the location, identity, or circumstances of any of the suicides. The Snopes report was shared 19,000 times..."
Unless the AfD win it makes zero difference to Brexit whether Schulz or Merkel lead the next CDU-SPD Grand Coalition
Merkel is in the toaster
As WG suggests if she does not squeeze the AfD she is and the CDU may dump her for someone who can
She's just been enthroned as the candidate, and the CSU are causing much less trouble all of a sudden.
given how well she cocked up the last election maybe the CSU should stop being complacent
Cocked it up? She came within a whisker of an absolute majority for the first time since German reunification.
yes she did, but only by screwing the FDP. and then when she didnt win outright she had no coalition partner to help he govern , hence why we have a grand coalition
Shiner should be prosecuted and given a very lengthy sentence. Human rights matter. He has traduced that and gone on a personal wet dream vendetta against innocent soldiers. He risks making all human rights lawyers look like Amal Clooney - politcally biased trouble makers / do-gooders.
Excellent Don. That is my hope as a fervent remoaner that negotiations will prove so tortuous that the Tories will start to split, again, over this and we will end up with another referendum where hopefully facts will overshadow the lies we had the first time round. £300m for the NHS. Bollocks.Immigration slashed. Bollocks.
The latest line from the Leavers is that this was a suggestion not a commitment:
...
National Health Service (Funding Target) Bill. This would require that by the next general election, the NHS receives a £100 million per week real-terms cash transfusion over and above current plans. This will be paid for by savings from the UK’s contributions to the EU budget and other savings from leaving (e.g. we will not pay the billions that the ECJ is ordering us to pay to multinational companies trying to avoid UK taxes)."
Not much of a suggestion about that.
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
The real mistake was the renegotiation. Simply doing that implied that the EU was unacceptable as it stood, and that he would make the difference. All this achieved was muzzling those in favour of our memberaship, allowing those opposed to ask for the impossible, and for him looking daft when he came home with some technical proposals that couldn't be sold.
Completely agree with that. The EU was a source of irritation and a long term concern but pretty far down my list of concerns in 2015. I agreed with almost all of what Cameron had said in his Bloomberg speech and hoped that the EU could be reformed to something closer to the UK's taste.
And then Cameron tried to negotiate some reforms. And it was embarrassing. And made it crystal clear that the bulk of the EU (or at least the bits that count) were completely committed to a path that I for one did not want to go down. It turned me from a very reluctant remainer into a leaver. It destroyed any hope that the EU might in future be a free trade organisation that left its members to get on with except to the extent that this caused market distortions.
I think that sooner or later, Brexit would have taken place. Our relationship with the EU was transactional. No more than a relatively small proportion of the population had any emotional commitment to the organisation.
Unless the AfD win it makes zero difference to Brexit whether Schulz or Merkel lead the next CDU-SPD Grand Coalition
Merkel is in the toaster
As WG suggests if she does not squeeze the AfD she is and the CDU may dump her for someone who can
She's just been enthroned as the candidate, and the CSU are causing much less trouble all of a sudden.
given how well she cocked up the last election maybe the CSU should stop being complacent
Cocked it up? She came within a whisker of an absolute majority for the first time since German reunification.
yes she did, but only by screwing the FDP. and then when she didnt win outright she had no coalition partner to help he govern , hence why we have a grand coalition
Quite, 1% less for the CDU and 1% more for the FDP would have given them a comfortable majority between them.
The markets really are ridiculous aren't they. So Le Pen launches a manifesto based on all the policies she's been banging on about for years, absolutely no surprises, and that sends French bonds up?!
Bonds down, yield up (or more precisely the spread between German and French bond yields up).
Perceived increased relative risk of France defaulting
that in the Remain stronghold of St Albans, the percentage remain ranged from 74% in St Peters (centre of St Albans) to 51% in London Colney (more C2DE south of St Albans)
Shiner should be prosecuted and given a very lengthy sentence. Human rights matter. He has traduced that and gone on a personal wet dream vendetta against innocent soldiers. He risks making all human rights lawyers look like Amal Clooney - politcally biased trouble makers / do-gooders.
The allegations, which the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found to have been proved to the criminal standard of proof, would suggest that charges of fraud and perverting the course of justice could be brought against him.
Last week. We ended up pretty much in meetings or writing proposals every working hour. Had one trip in the rain on a dinner cruise on the creek, and got to see the ridiculousness of emperor penguins in Ski Dubai.
Excellent Don. That is my hope as a fervent remoaner that negotiations will prove so tortuous that the Tories will start to split, again, over this and we will end up with another referendum where hopefully facts will overshadow the lies we had the first time round. £300m for the NHS. Bollocks.Immigration slashed. Bollocks.
The latest line from the Leavers is that this was a suggestion not a commitment:
...
National Health Service (Funding Target) Bill. This would require that by the next general election, the NHS receives a £100 million per week real-terms cash transfusion over and above current plans. This will be paid for by savings from the UK’s contributions to the EU budget and other savings from leaving (e.g. we will not pay the billions that the ECJ is ordering us to pay to multinational companies trying to avoid UK taxes)."
Not much of a suggestion about that.
Cameron should have outlined what he intended to do in the event of Leave winning. In the absence of that, all the Leave campaigns could do was suggest what could be done
Perhaps he should have appointed an official Leave Campaign which then produced an official Leave manifesto?
The real mistake was the renegotiation. Simply doing that implied that the EU was unacceptable as it stood, and that he would make the difference. All this achieved was muzzling those in favour of our memberaship, allowing those opposed to ask for the impossible, and for him looking daft when he came home with some technical proposals that couldn't be sold.
Completely agree with that. The EU was a source of irritation and a long term concern but pretty far down my list of concerns in 2015. I agreed with almost all of what Cameron had said in his Bloomberg speech and hoped that the EU could be reformed to something closer to the UK's taste.
And then Cameron tried to negotiate some reforms. And it was embarrassing. And made it crystal clear that the bulk of the EU (or at least the bits that count) were completely committed to a path that I for one did not want to go down. It turned me from a very reluctant remainer into a leaver. It destroyed any hope that the EU might in future be a free trade organisation that left its members to get on with except to the extent that this caused market distortions.
I think that sooner or later, Brexit would have taken place. Our relationship with the EU was transactional. No more than a relatively small proportion of the population had any emotional commitment to the organisation.
Yep, and if it is to be done, it's better that it be done quickly.
On topic: My current, somewhat conflicted and conflicting, position on Brexit:
Plan A has to be to make Brexit succeed, in line with the referendum. I'd have liked softer Brexit, but May's speech is about as good a pitch as I can imagine to make a fairly hard Brexit a success.
That said, imagining myself as a Labour MP, I'd have been tempted to rebel on invoking Article 50 at the present time. This would be the basis that May has thus far failed to deliver adequately on step 1 of her plan - to have full clarity on the process of Brexit, and in particular on any efforts to clarify whether A50 can be revoked. I know this government has made its own 'deal or no deal' position known, and that's fine, but who is to say that it is this administration that will be in charge when the clock runs out.
Options for a Remain rearguard should be prepared for as a plan B, but only for the event that the economic and/or geopolitical environment becomes very hostile come the end of A50 negotiations and public attitude to Brexit has changed as a result. There are no shortage of doom scenarios around currently that might drive this, but the more important planning would be to prepare the ground for how a May government could be brought to heel or, if necessary, brought down before signing off on the A50 negotiations.
As of today, though, I am not of the opinion today that we should have a second referendum at the end of A50 simply for the hell of it.
"Et la mayonnaise a pris. Maintenant, ils sont comme cul et chemise avec Nigel Farage" s’amuse-t-elle.
They gelled, and now they get on with each other like a house on fire.
She says she also tried to bring about friendly relations (rapprochement) with the AfD. In the 2014 EU elections she topped the list in the Eastern region of France for Dupont-Aignan's Debout La Republique party, now called Debout La France, which she'd helped to shape for seven years.
Last week. We ended up pretty much in meetings or writing proposals every working hour. Had one trip in the rain on a dinner cruise on the creek, and got to see the ridiculousness of emperor penguins in Ski Dubai.
Cool. So you managed a little culture then. Did you see any of the golf? Oh, and apologies, for the very British/American weather last Friday!
that in the Remain stronghold of St Albans, the percentage remain ranged from 74% in St Peters (centre of St Albans) to 51% in London Colney (more C2DE south of St Albans)
It's surprising that solidly Conservative wards (especially in Harpenden) voted Remain.
On topic: My current, somewhat conflicted and conflicting, position on Brexit:
Plan A has to be to make Brexit succeed, in line with the referendum. I'd have liked softer Brexit, but May's speech is about as good a pitch as I can imagine to make a fairly hard Brexit a success.
That said, imagining myself as a Labour MP, I'd have been tempted to rebel on invoking Article 50 at the present time. This would be the basis that May has thus far failed to deliver adequately on step 1 of her plan - to have full clarity on the process of Brexit, and in particular on any efforts to clarify whether A50 can be revoked. I know this government has made its own 'deal or no deal' position known, and that's fine, but who is to say that it is this administration that will be in charge when the clock runs out.
Options for a Remain rearguard should be prepared for as a plan B, but only for the event that the economic and/or geopolitical environment becomes very hostile come the end of A50 negotiations and public attitude to Brexit has changed as a result. There are no shortage of doom scenarios around currently that might drive this, but the more important planning would be to prepare the ground for how a May government could be brought to heel or, if necessary, brought down before signing off on the A50 negotiations.
As of today, though, I am not of the opinion today that we should have a second referendum at the end of A50 simply for the hell of it.
Hmmm, apart from the first sentence, the rest of the post is staunchly remain and how to reverse the decision.
Nothing says more about the sad state of the Labour Party than someone finding Emily Thornbury impressive.
That is the point where I stopped reading to scroll down and see who could have written such patent crap. No surprise ...
Unrelated, I need your input on something America.
Would you say Texas is in just the South or in the Deep South?
There a lot of liberal cities in Texas in terms of voting. Houston, Dallas, Austin very suburban.
That's true of much of the South. North Carolina has Charlotte, Georgia has Atlanta, Louisiana has New Orleans, Florida has Miami, but in most cases, rural and small town voters are numerous enough to outvote the liberal big city voters. The exception is Virginia, where the exurbs of Washington now outvote the rest.
Ladbrokes have new market up for the new West Of England Regional Mayor They have Lib Dem Stephen Williams former Bristol West MP as Evens Fav Cons 11/10 Lab 7/1 Greens 50/1 UKIP 100/1
On topic: My current, somewhat conflicted and conflicting, position on Brexit:
Plan A has to be to make Brexit succeed, in line with the referendum. I'd have liked softer Brexit, but May's speech is about as good a pitch as I can imagine to make a fairly hard Brexit a success.
That said, imagining myself as a Labour MP, I'd have been tempted to rebel on invoking Article 50 at the present time. This would be the basis that May has thus far failed to deliver adequately on step 1 of her plan - to have full clarity on the process of Brexit, and in particular on any efforts to clarify whether A50 can be revoked. I know this government has made its own 'deal or no deal' position known, and that's fine, but who is to say that it is this administration that will be in charge when the clock runs out.
Options for a Remain rearguard should be prepared for as a plan B, but only for the event that the economic and/or geopolitical environment becomes very hostile come the end of A50 negotiations and public attitude to Brexit has changed as a result. There are no shortage of doom scenarios around currently that might drive this, but the more important planning would be to prepare the ground for how a May government could be brought to heel or, if necessary, brought down before signing off on the A50 negotiations.
As of today, though, I am not of the opinion today that we should have a second referendum at the end of A50 simply for the hell of it.
Assuming Article 50 is enacted somewhen in March as expected, there are one of four possible outcomes
1) We do a deal with the EU27 and leave 2) We dont do a deal with the EU27 and leave to WTO terms 3) The CJEU rules that we can reverse Art 50, and at some point we chicken out and do so 4) We dont do a deal and persuade all the other 27 to extend the negotiating period
3) is pretty unlikely as it make the whole time limit think pointless if we can "do the hokey-cokey" until we get a deal we like.
4) is pretty unlikely as getting 27 countries to agree with anything in the EU is pretty unlikely.
Personally I think 1) is fairly unlikely unless the deal is ultra-simple because although its by QMV there are enough awkward countries to make it hard to pass, and the European Parliament has to approve it as well.
I can't see that any sort of post Art. 50 plan makes sense for other parties, they need to let May own the result, because if they bring her down they are still going to have to deliver realistically either option 1) or 2) within 2 years or they are going to own it instead.
Anyone who thinks BrExit is going to be a disaster should follow Napoleon's maxim, largely because they can't do much to improve it and might just end up carrying the can for it.
@SandyRentool thanks for your link to the power station the other night. Amazing what you miss that's literally on your doorstep sometimes. +1
You're welcome - any questions on the power sector in the UAE, I'm your man!
Very good. I usually try and keep up on these things but it's amazing what we don't know even when we think we're relatively knowledgable on a subject. I did get a fright with the pin in the map on the site you linked though, it's about 2 miles from where I live!! It's actually a centre point drawn on 'Dubai', the actual location is half an hour away.
On topic: My current, somewhat conflicted and conflicting, position on Brexit:
Plan A has to be to make Brexit succeed, in line with the referendum. I'd have liked softer Brexit, but May's speech is about as good a pitch as I can imagine to make a fairly hard Brexit a success.
That said, imagining myself as a Labour MP, I'd have been tempted to rebel on invoking Article 50 at the present time. This would be the basis that May has thus far failed to deliver adequately on step 1 of her plan - to have full clarity on the process of Brexit, and in particular on any efforts to clarify whether A50 can be revoked. I know this government has made its own 'deal or no deal' position known, and that's fine, but who is to say that it is this administration that will be in charge when the clock runs out.
Options for a Remain rearguard should be prepared for as a plan B, but only for the event that the economic and/or geopolitical environment becomes very hostile come the end of A50 negotiations and public attitude to Brexit has changed as a result. There are no shortage of doom scenarios around currently that might drive this, but the more important planning would be to prepare the ground for how a May government could be brought to heel or, if necessary, brought down before signing off on the A50 negotiations.
As of today, though, I am not of the opinion today that we should have a second referendum at the end of A50 simply for the hell of it.
Hmmm, apart from the first sentence, the rest of the post is staunchly remain and how to reverse the decision.
The second paragraph is not so much about reversal / resistance but more about making sure things are done right.
And, despite my arguing on here consistently for Remain then soft Brexit, it comes back into play for me if and only if things go badly tits up.
If Brexit is the unparalleled or even modest success we are promised, you will be able to colour me very happy.
An expensive day for the Ukip MEP Jane Collins – the high court in London has ordered her to pay £54,000 each to three of Rotherham’s Labour MPs over a speech she made at the party’s 2014 conference about the town’s abuse scandal.
Collins, MEP for Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire said the MPs knew many of the details of the exploitation yet chose not to intervene, and instead acted on misplaced political correctness, the libel hearing heard.
Nothing says more about the sad state of the Labour Party than someone finding Emily Thornbury impressive.
That is the point where I stopped reading to scroll down and see who could have written such patent crap. No surprise ...
Unrelated, I need your input on something America.
Would you say Texas is in just the South or in the Deep South?
You make the mistake of thinking of Texas as being part of the United States.
Texas is the Yorkshire of America.
Full of brilliant, intelligent, hard working, self effacing people who are the backbone of the country.
Indeed recent events would very much suggest that it is NY and California that are not really America. The jibe at Hillary 'How can you presume to govern a country you've never been to' seems spot on.
Nothing says more about the sad state of the Labour Party than someone finding Emily Thornbury impressive.
That is the point where I stopped reading to scroll down and see who could have written such patent crap. No surprise ...
Unrelated, I need your input on something America.
Would you say Texas is in just the South or in the Deep South?
You make the mistake of thinking of Texas as being part of the United States.
Texas is the Yorkshire of America.
Full of brilliant, intelligent, hard working, self effacing people who are the backbone of the country.
Indeed recent events would very much suggest that it is NY and California that are not really America. The jibe at Hillary 'How can you presume to govern a country you've never been to' seems spot on.
Comments
Although that would imply Remain voters have all contracted syphilis from prostitutes...
And then Cameron tried to negotiate some reforms. And it was embarrassing. And made it crystal clear that the bulk of the EU (or at least the bits that count) were completely committed to a path that I for one did not want to go down. It turned me from a very reluctant remainer into a leaver. It destroyed any hope that the EU might in future be a free trade organisation that left its members to get on with except to the extent that this caused market distortions.
ttps://twitter.com/Sargon_of_Akkad/status/828592749997862912
Sargon of Akkad
It would benefit journalists immensely if they would simply block Donald Trump's twitter account.
Hollande going, Renzi gone and Merkel going now by the looks of it.
Hilarious.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/828591517514219525
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/jeremy-clarkson-praises-larkhalls-cheeky-9658029
https://tinyurl.com/jyma4n8
Yeah, 'cos someone with mental health problems should be taken to a Mosque in the first instance.
Oh to be in Taksim Square again
I can't speak for anyone else, but as an ardent leaver I just wanted to win the vote. That's done and what will be, will be.
http://www.nickstricks.net/wp/?p=295
It seems that in Trumpland it is the obese states that vote Trump, though in large part it is because the white Americans who are doing so. Whites in ethnically mixed states are more likely to vote Trump.
That is the point where I stopped reading to scroll down and see who could have written such patent crap. No surprise ...
Would you say Texas is in just the South or in the Deep South?
We cataloged every major fake news story since Trump's inauguration. It's a depressingly long list. https://t.co/ZYS5N27Qid
16 stories so far in two weeks
"Since at least Donald Trump’s election, our media have been in the grip of an astonishing, self-inflicted crisis. Despite Trump’s constant railing against the American press, there is no greater enemy of the American media than the American media. They did this to themselves.
We are in the midst of an epidemic of fake news. There is no better word to describe it than “epidemic,” insofar as it fits the epidemiological model from the Centers for Disease Control: this phenomenon occurs when “an agent and susceptible hosts are present in adequate numbers, and the agent can be effectively conveyed from a source to the susceptible hosts.
...Whenever you turn on a news station, visit a news website, or check in on a journalist or media personality on Twitter or Facebook, there is an excellent chance you will be exposed to fake news. It is rapidly becoming an accepted part of the way the American media are run."
Anna Soubry:
- I'll never forgive Boris Johnson.
- Labour is to blame for Brexit because they can't talk to their own constituents.
The markets really are ridiculous aren't they. So Le Pen launches a manifesto based on all the policies she's been banging on about for years, absolutely no surprises, and that sends French bonds up?!
* years apparently!!!
"After Trump’s electoral victory on November 8, rumors began circulating that multiple transgender teenagers had killed themselves in response to the election results. There was no basis to these rumors. Nobody was able to confirm them at the time, and nobody has been able to confirm in the three months since Trump was elected.
Nevertheless, the claim spread far and wide: Guardian writer and editor-at-large of Out Zach Stafford tweeted the rumor, which was retweeted more than 13,000 times before he deleted it. He later posted a tweet explaining why he deleted his original viral tweet; his explanatory tweet was shared a total of seven times. Meanwhile, PinkNews writer Dominic Preston wrote a report on the rumors, which garnered more than 12,000 shares on Facebook...
At Mic, Matthew Rodriguez wrote about the unsubstantiated allegations. His article was shared more than 55,000 times on Facebook. Urban legend debunker website Snopes wrote a report on the rumors and listed them as “unconfirmed” (rather than “false”). Snopes’s sources were two Facebook posts, since deleted, that offered no helpful information regarding the location, identity, or circumstances of any of the suicides. The Snopes report was shared 19,000 times..."
https://order-order.com/2017/02/06/how-shami-supported-shiner/
One of them is getting struck off and hopefully heading to prison, the other is now the shadow attorney general. No open goal, there, not at all.
Perceived increased relative risk of France defaulting
that in the Remain stronghold of St Albans, the percentage remain ranged from 74% in St Peters (centre of St Albans) to 51% in London Colney (more C2DE south of St Albans)
THE first international march for Scottish independence is to be held at the Hague in the Netherlands in April.
Plan A has to be to make Brexit succeed, in line with the referendum. I'd have liked softer Brexit, but May's speech is about as good a pitch as I can imagine to make a fairly hard Brexit a success.
That said, imagining myself as a Labour MP, I'd have been tempted to rebel on invoking Article 50 at the present time. This would be the basis that May has thus far failed to deliver adequately on step 1 of her plan - to have full clarity on the process of Brexit, and in particular on any efforts to clarify whether A50 can be revoked. I know this government has made its own 'deal or no deal' position known, and that's fine, but who is to say that it is this administration that will be in charge when the clock runs out.
Options for a Remain rearguard should be prepared for as a plan B, but only for the event that the economic and/or geopolitical environment becomes very hostile come the end of A50 negotiations and public attitude to Brexit has changed as a result. There are no shortage of doom scenarios around currently that might drive this, but the more important planning would be to prepare the ground for how a May government could be brought to heel or, if necessary, brought down before signing off on the A50 negotiations.
As of today, though, I am not of the opinion today that we should have a second referendum at the end of A50 simply for the hell of it.
"Et la mayonnaise a pris. Maintenant, ils sont comme cul et chemise avec Nigel Farage" s’amuse-t-elle.
They gelled, and now they get on with each other like a house on fire.
She says she also tried to bring about friendly relations (rapprochement) with the AfD. In the 2014 EU elections she topped the list in the Eastern region of France for Dupont-Aignan's Debout La Republique party, now called Debout La France, which she'd helped to shape for seven years.
Journalist to Mr Plantation Owner: "What do you say to those who criticize slavery?"
Mr Plantation Owner: "We do not practice slavery. We have jobs available only to blacks."
Journalist: "How do you respond to allegations that you discriminate against blacks!"
Mr Plantation Owner: "How can we be discriminating against blacks? Whites aren't even allowed to apply!"
Full of brilliant, intelligent, hard working, self effacing people who are the backbone of the country.
They have Lib Dem Stephen Williams former Bristol West MP as Evens Fav
Cons 11/10
Lab 7/1
Greens 50/1
UKIP 100/1
1) We do a deal with the EU27 and leave
2) We dont do a deal with the EU27 and leave to WTO terms
3) The CJEU rules that we can reverse Art 50, and at some point we chicken out and do so
4) We dont do a deal and persuade all the other 27 to extend the negotiating period
3) is pretty unlikely as it make the whole time limit think pointless if we can "do the hokey-cokey" until we get a deal we like.
4) is pretty unlikely as getting 27 countries to agree with anything in the EU is pretty unlikely.
Personally I think 1) is fairly unlikely unless the deal is ultra-simple because although its by QMV there are enough awkward countries to make it hard to pass, and the European Parliament has to approve it as well.
I can't see that any sort of post Art. 50 plan makes sense for other parties, they need to let May own the result, because if they bring her down they are still going to have to deliver realistically either option 1) or 2) within 2 years or they are going to own it instead.
Anyone who thinks BrExit is going to be a disaster should follow Napoleon's maxim, largely because they can't do much to improve it and might just end up carrying the can for it.
And, despite my arguing on here consistently for Remain then soft Brexit, it comes back into play for me if and only if things go badly tits up.
If Brexit is the unparalleled or even modest success we are promised, you will be able to colour me very happy.
Collins, MEP for Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire said the MPs knew many of the details of the exploitation yet chose not to intervene, and instead acted on misplaced political correctness, the libel hearing heard.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/feb/06/may-to-meet-netanyahu-ahead-of-brexit-debate-in-commons-live-updates