As with Scotland, it seems the happy medium has been found
We are leaving the EU, and leavers have handed the control of our departure to Remainers
Scotland is staying in the UK, and we have let Leavers look after things up there
The extremes on both sides are moaning, but most people are ok with it
Yes. We are down to hardcore obsessives now.
A shrewd opposition could now play Brexit to their advantage.
The newly gained control of tax policy on imported products, the ability to replace aid with trade and the ability to build an immigration policy that both restricts numbers but removes the disparity between Europe and the rest of the world offer real opportunities to demonstrate forward thinking.
Clinging to last century positions on Europe is for those wedded to the past.
Very good news. The tide seems to be turning. Not surprising really. Those who wanted change by definition are the ones who voted 'Leave' and so far nothing has changed. What's more if nothing changes for the better-and lets be honest it's not likely too-they'll be on your tails like a pack of hyenas.
The sh*t is slowly beginning to hit the fan. Brexit (if it happens) will be painful and tortuous and all for what? To essentially limit the number of foreigners and darkies coming in? Massive price to pay to the darkies out I say.
An ugly comment that says more about you than others.
The leave campaign was the very definition of ugly!!!
You mean with the promised instant recession, soaring unemployment and punishment budget?
"By defeating Ukip here we drew a line in the sand and showed that people in places such as Stoke-on-Trent do not see that party as a solution to their problems. But the battle that we faced shows that we can no longer take lifelong Labour voters for granted".
Leading figures in the Labour Party admit that for years they have taken their core voters for granted...
As with Scotland, it seems the happy medium has been found
We are leaving the EU, and leavers have handed the control of our departure to Remainers
Scotland is staying in the UK, and we have let Leavers look after things up there
The extremes on both sides are moaning, but most people are ok with it
Yes. We are down to hardcore obsessives now.
A shrewd opposition could now play Brexit to their advantage.
The newly gained control of tax policy on imported products, the ability to replace aid with trade and the ability to build an immigration policy that both restricts numbers but removes the disparity between Europe and the rest of the world offer real opportunities to demonstrate forward thinking.
Clinging to last century positions on Europe is for those wedded to the past.
The failed last century position on Europe is the belief that we can stand apart from it, and the only ones longing for it like a stolen comfort blanket are the Brexiteers.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
I did look at lots of bets on this match, briefly. Thought England would win by a mile, but the odds (circa evens for a 40 point margin) were too poor. Briefly tempted by 130 on Italy as a trading bet, but thought they'd be blown away and the odds would only lengthen.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
As with Scotland, it seems the happy medium has been found
We are leaving the EU, and leavers have handed the control of our departure to Remainers
Scotland is staying in the UK, and we have let Leavers look after things up there
The extremes on both sides are moaning, but most people are ok with it
Unfortunately I don't think this is the case. Regardless of whether you think leaving the EU is a good thing, we need to make the best of it if we are going ahead. Neither Leavers nor Remainers are engaging on the practical issues. Leavers because they can't; Remainers because they don't want to.
The biggest lie of the Leave campaign wasn't the £350 million for the NHS; it was the implied promise that leaving the EU was free of consequences - we will be more disconnected; there will be more demand for patronage at the point when the taxbase shrinks; there will be fewer trading prospects; it will stress the United Kingdom constitutionally - and so on. Having denied there were any real consequences to the decision to leave, and continuing to do so, they aren't in a position to deal with those consequences.
Remainers on the other hand don't see any reason to involve themselves in a project that they that is misbegotten and that they never agreed with. Why should they work their socks off to mitigate the damage so that we end up in a position that is better than it might be but worse than it was before? Especially if they think they are going to be blamed by Leavers for sabotaging the project where it does fall short.
It's not a good position to be in, but it is what it is.
That perhaps describes those who pontificate on here about it, but the person who has ultimate responsibility for it is our PM, and we haven't had one that was a leaver since 1991!
May's position is interesting, and I am actually sympathetic to it. Having argued for remaining in the EU, even half-heartedly, on the grounds leaving would damage the UK, she now is fully committed to leaving without explaining what's different now, beyond the fact people voted for it. Nick Cohen wrote an interesting polemic on it in the Spectator I don't agree with Cohen that she is dishonest, but I do think there are contradictions in May's position that make it difficult for her to deal with Brexit. Mrs May is not - for obvious reasons - promoting the strictly logical line that, yes, Britain could be worse off for leaving the EU, but as the PM it's her job to respect the will of the British people in the recent vote, and make the best of Brexit, whatever that is.
As with Scotland, it seems the happy medium has been found
We are leaving the EU, and leavers have handed the control of our departure to Remainers
Scotland is staying in the UK, and we have let Leavers look after things up there
The extremes on both sides are moaning, but most people are ok with it
Yes. We are down to hardcore obsessives now.
A shrewd opposition could now play Brexit to their advantage.
The newly gained control of tax policy on imported products, the ability to replace aid with trade and the ability to build an immigration policy that both restricts numbers but removes the disparity between Europe and the rest of the world offer real opportunities to demonstrate forward thinking.
Clinging to last century positions on Europe is for those wedded to the past.
The failed last century position on Europe is the belief that we can stand apart from it, and the only ones longing for it like a stolen comfort blanket are the Brexiteers.
I did look at lots of bets on this match, briefly. Thought England would win by a mile, but the odds (circa evens for a 40 point margin) were too poor. Briefly tempted by 130 on Italy as a trading bet, but thought they'd be blown away and the odds would only lengthen.
Shows what I know.
Scotland must be rubbing their hands together.
As I think we discussed on here two weeks ago Italy starting 15 aren't the whipping boys they once were, but the big difference is the replacements and thus last 20 minutes they struggle to compete.
Rob Wesley Paxton: only actor to fight all 7 classic movie monsters: an alien, a predator, a terminator, a vampire, a twister, a titanic, Willem Dafoe.
As has Neil Fingleton, who played the giant in Game of Thrones (who I assumed until this afternoon was done by CGI, because nobody could really be that size)
You shouldn't be taking this seriously. There isn't any doubt that the footage is genuine. If anyone is interested in the technicalities of why it is I can give it to them.
I am genuinely interested in the technicalities, so if you have a few moments. It's probably best if you do that by messaging me. To do that, go to my profile and press the message button
I've done it. It's a bit long and dry but if you want me to post it I will?
You shouldn't be taking this seriously. There isn't any doubt that the footage is genuine. If anyone is interested in the technicalities of why it is I can give it to them.
I am genuinely interested in the technicalities, so if you have a few moments. It's probably best if you do that by messaging me. To do that, go to my profile and press the message button
I've done it. It's a bit long and dry but if you want me to post it I will?
I would be interested. The fake sea voyage thread wouldn't be complete otherwise....
The extras on the DVD showed that two very tall chaps played the giants, and were doubled in size using computer magickery.
Ah. Yes, looking at stills, that must be right. But it is extraordinary - I know a 6'7" who looks way, way bigger taller than 6' on the nail me. 7'7" must be unbelievable.
As with Scotland, it seems the happy medium has been found
We are leaving the EU, and leavers have handed the control of our departure to Remainers
Scotland is staying in the UK, and we have let Leavers look after things up there
The extremes on both sides are moaning, but most people are ok with it
Unfortunately I don't think this is the case. Regardless of whether you think leaving the EU is a good thing, we need to make the best of it if we are going ahead. Neither Leavers nor Remainers are engaging on the practical issues. Leavers because they can't; Remainers because they don't want to.
It's not a good position to be in, but it is what it is.
That perhaps describes those who pontificate on here about it, but the person who has ultimate responsibility for it is our PM, and we haven't had one that was a leaver since 1991!
May's position is interesting, and I am actually sympathetic to it. Having argued for remaining in the EU, even half-heartedly, on the grounds leaving would damage the UK, she now is fully committed to leaving without explaining what's different now, beyond the fact people voted for it. Nick Cohen wrote an interesting polemic on it in the Spectator I don't agree with Cohen that she is dishonest, but I do think there are contradictions in May's position that make it difficult for her to deal with Brexit. Mrs May is not - for obvious reasons - promoting the strictly logical line that, yes, Britain could be worse off for leaving the EU, but as the PM it's her job to respect the will of the British people in the recent vote, and make the best of Brexit, whatever that is.
The PM in referendums should not campaign heavily either way, as it means he or she cannot do their job afterwards f they lose. If only Cameron had sat impartially from the sidelines, we would be hearing a lot less moaning.
If one result is so disastrous for the country that the PM has to campaign hard against it, there should be no referendum. He was elected to make such judgements
Most people must know this, but they would lose imagined PB capital by fessing up, so don't admit it
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
It looks like random variation to me. Very few are changing their minds either way, which is itself striking.
Proposals for change often become more popular once passed. This one hasn't.
This one still isn't accepted by the people who lost in the media or the members of parliament. The options seem to be the establishment's choice or a divided country
Theresa May was a Remainer who has accepted the result, and she is now cast as a hardline Brexiteer on the back of it!
She was lukewarm at best and when she saw where her ambition was best serviced she was quick to follow its star.
In my experience talking to colleagues attitudes have hardened. If you were for in, you're just waiting for the mess to start.
Eddie Jones is a genius. He worked out how to beat that Italian chicanery. Some of the England stuff in the 2nd half was awesome.
Anyone who's watched a game of rugby worked out how to beat it after seeing it the first time. Pick and go.
The England players required a half time the talk to reprogram their brains. They managed to stick to the new script for a good 10 mins after half time then Care went of and Youngs froze in the headlights like he'd was totally surprised by the tactics.
If the opposition doesn't compete at the tackle you just pick up the ball and walk forward, it's not rocket science.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Some of the ardentleavers have waited many years for their victory. Arguably they have earned the right to be a little arrogant - the great majority have been magnanimous most of the time but some posters on here would try the patience of St Theresa.
As with Scotland, it seems the happy medium has been found
We are leaving the EU, and leavers have handed the control of our departure to Remainers
Scotland is staying in the UK, and we have let Leavers look after things up there
The extremes on both sides are moaning, but most people are ok with it
Yes. We are down to hardcore obsessives now.
A shrewd opposition could now play Brexit to their advantage.
The newly gained control of tax policy on imported products, the ability to replace aid with trade and the ability to build an immigration policy that both restricts numbers but removes the disparity between Europe and the rest of the world offer real opportunities to demonstrate forward thinking.
Clinging to last century positions on Europe is for those wedded to the past.
The failed last century position on Europe is the belief that we can stand apart from it, and the only ones longing for it like a stolen comfort blanket are the Brexiteers.
The future is global.
You could, of course, put the US, Japan or any developed nation on there.
The question is whether we will be more free trade post-Brexit than pre-; I very much hope that we will, but am fearful that the world will slip back into protectionism (see the US Border Tax Adjustment).
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
Tony Blair, like Marine le Pen and Geert Wilders, is in favour of his base country belonging to a reformed EU. His main difference with them is that he's a lot keener on the US.
Is there any path to negotiations on reforming the EU that doesn't pass through a far-right populist victory in France? Britgov certainly isn't in a position where it can go to Brussels and say "Hey, let's negotiate reform".
Admittedly it's not what things are called that counts most. But still.
Why is Macron's price going up? "Let's go Nordic" sounds so 1970s. And don't worry, no big problems that need solving. But safe and skilled hands! Who's going to vote for that outside of the Parisian state-sector middle class and its smaller analogues elsewhere? This guy is not going to get into the Elysée.
I haven't met a single person who thinks Macron will be able to hold his own in the TV debates against Le Pen. And the TV debates count far more than polls two months out, as the primaries showed.
20 Mar: TF1, 5 candidates 3 Apr: BFMTV, all candidates 20 Apr: F2, all candidates 23 Apr: round 1 then a one-on-one, surely (unlike in 2002 when Chirac refused to debate Le Pen père) 7 May: round 2
I wonder how pollees would answer on Macron-Le Pen if the pollster framed the question as follows.
"Who will you be voting for in the second round, if the candidates who win the most votes in the first round, and who then debate each other head-to-head on TV, are Macron and Le Pen?"
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Some of the ardentleavers have waited many years for their victory. Arguably they have earned the right to be a little arrogant - the great majority have been magnanimous most of the time but some posters on here would try the patience of St Theresa.
SeanT taunts Remainers, but other than that, which is obviously done for effect in part, do many people really even brag or boast about it? When we voted to leave I had no idea the job wasn't done in some people's eyes, it is pretty weird
You shouldn't be taking this seriously. There isn't any doubt that the footage is genuine. If anyone is interested in the technicalities of why it is I can give it to them.
I am genuinely interested in the technicalities, so if you have a few moments. It's probably best if you do that by messaging me. To do that, go to my profile and press the message button
I've done it. It's a bit long and dry but if you want me to post it I will?
Yes please. I won't be able to read it until late tonight, so no rush.
The PM in referendums should not campaign heavily either way, as it means he or she cannot do their job afterwards f they lose. If only Cameron had sat impartially from the sidelines, we would be hearing a lot less moaning.
If one result is so disastrous for the country that the PM has to campaign hard against it, there should be no referendum. He was elected to make such judgements
Most people must know this, but they would lose imagined PB capital by fessing up, so don't admit it
I agree with you on referendums. What I meant to say about Theresa May is that just as Leavers can't deal with the consequences of Brexit because they don't accept there are any, Mrs May can't deal with the consequences either because she has never explained her switch from Remain to Leave.
Tony Blair, like Marine le Pen and Geert Wilders, is in favour of his base country belonging to a reformed EU. His main difference with them is that he's a lot keener on the US.
Is there any path to negotiations on reforming the EU that doesn't pass through a far-right populist victory in France? Britgov certainly isn't in a position where it can go to Brussels and say "Hey, let's negotiate reform".
Admittedly it's not what things are called that counts most. But still.
Why is Macron's price going up? "Let's go Nordic" sounds so 1970s. And don't worry, no big problems that need solving. But safe and skilled hands! Who's going to vote for that outside of the Parisian state-sector middle class and its smaller analogues elsewhere? This guy is not going to get into the Elysée.
I haven't met a single person who thinks Macron will be able to hold his own in the TV debates against Le Pen. And the TV debates count far more than polls two months out, as the primaries showed.
20 Mar: TF1, 5 candidates 3 Apr: BFMTV, all candidates 20 Apr: F2, all candidates 23 Apr: round 1 then a one-on-one, surely (unlike in 2002 when Chirac refused to debate Le Pen père) 7 May: round 2
I wonder how pollees would answer on Macron-Le Pen if the pollster framed the question as follows.
"Who will you be voting for in the second round, if the candidates who win the most votes in the first round, and who then debate each other head-to-head on TV, are Macron and Le Pen?"
Why would Macron debate Le Pen when he'll be 20 points ahead in the second round?
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
RCS1000--Word of advice-Think before you commit to print.Also it is MS who chooses to run this site.No-one forces him to & as such you take the brickbats as well as the bouquets.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
Things don't happen just because they're electorally convenient for the government.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
Is it? There are other timetables in play but for the cynical purposes of GE2020, surely CCHQ would quite like to be only part way out, in order to fight a classic "let us finish the job" and "no time for a novice" election.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
Things don't happen just because they're electorally convenient for the government.
The government serves A50 by March 2017. The two year negotiation ends March 2019.
Be very clear. Every bump in the road will be the fault of the EU and Remainers who cannot accept the result. Every single one.
Tony Blair, like Marine le Pen and Geert Wilders, is in favour of his base country belonging to a reformed EU. His main difference with them is that he's a lot keener on the US.
Is there any path to negotiations on reforming the EU that doesn't pass through a far-right populist victory in France? Britgov certainly isn't in a position where it can go to Brussels and say "Hey, let's negotiate reform".
Admittedly it's not what things are called that counts most. But still.
Why is Macron's price going up? "Let's go Nordic" sounds so 1970s. And don't worry, no big problems that need solving. But safe and skilled hands! Who's going to vote for that outside of the Parisian state-sector middle class and its smaller analogues elsewhere? This guy is not going to get into the Elysée.
I haven't met a single person who thinks Macron will be able to hold his own in the TV debates against Le Pen. And the TV debates count far more than polls two months out, as the primaries showed.
20 Mar: TF1, 5 candidates 3 Apr: BFMTV, all candidates 20 Apr: F2, all candidates 23 Apr: round 1 then a one-on-one, surely (unlike in 2002 when Chirac refused to debate Le Pen père) 7 May: round 2
I wonder how pollees would answer on Macron-Le Pen if the pollster framed the question as follows.
"Who will you be voting for in the second round, if the candidates who win the most votes in the first round, and who then debate each other head-to-head on TV, are Macron and Le Pen?"
Why would Macron debate Le Pen when he'll be 20 points ahead in the second round?
Bit of a trick question, that. She is likely to do better than he does in the multi-candidate debates. It's unlikely the polls will say 60-40 after R1. But even if they do, how can he seriously say at that point that he won't debate her head-to-head because he abhors what she stands for? Or what other reason might he give that doesn't haemorrhage support?
RCS1000--Never said or suggested that you ignorant prat.
I am sure rcs1000 would never stoop to saying "Do you know who I am", but do you know who he is?
"Do you know who I am? I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal. People know me. I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany."
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
Is it? There are other timetables in play but for the cynical purposes of GE2020, surely CCHQ would quite like to be only part way out, in order to fight a classic "let us finish the job" and "no time for a novice" election.
It leaves the Tories open to accusations of failure and backsliding. They have to deliver.
RCS1000--Never said or suggested that you ignorant prat.
I am sure rcs1000 would never stoop to saying "Do you know who I am", but do you know who he is?
"Do you know who I am? I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal. People know me. I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany."
Eddie Jones is a genius. He worked out how to beat that Italian chicanery. Some of the England stuff in the 2nd half was awesome.
Anyone who's watched a game of rugby worked out how to beat it after seeing it the first time. Pick and go.
The England players required a half time the talk to reprogram their brains. They managed to stick to the new script for a good 10 mins after half time then Care went of and Youngs froze in the headlights like he'd was totally surprised by the tactics.
If the opposition doesn't compete at the tackle you just pick up the ball and walk forward, it's not rocket science.
Except that the entire England team - skilled international players, grand slam winners, 2nd best team in world rugby - were entirely confused and bewildered by the Italian tactic. With all respect, I imagine they know even more about rugby than you.
So it wasn't at all obvious how to respond. But they got there in the end.
Anyway its a fascinating six nations. Some great games. I think Scotland will lose to England in a close match, but England will then lose to Ireland....
When England get their best players back they could be a match for the All Blacks. Maybe.
Come on Sean....The England captain and Haskell were having to ask the ref what the rules were...that is appalling. It is like Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad after 10 years of test cricket asking the umpire to explain the LBW law because they weren't sure if they should make an appeal or not.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
There is nothing in the footage that gives me any reason to suspect it’s fake. What we know for certain is that it’s shot on a single camera and there are two tracks one sound one vision. We also know he was on a real boat and we have a good idea of the size of that boat. So the claim must be that the background scene has been put in afterwards.
The only way it could practically have been superimposed is by using a blue/green screen which because he’s full length would have meant that the screen was behind the boat. In other words it would have to be huge. A massive building job with a foreground boat in an exterior studio. The alternative would be building the skeleton of the boat around the person and shooting it in a green/blue screen studio which would be just as expensive and completely prohibitive for news footage.
What's more if they had done it this way it would have been done more professionally. At least two cameras and with proper cut-aways . So the first reason you know it's real is because faking it would have been impossibly expensive and would have had a different look and mor filmic look.
I imagine the reason people might think it’s fake is because of the awkwardness of the shot but that’s another reason why you know it’s authentic. It’s clearly shot with one camera on legs.
Near the beginning the presenter-in shot- tells the cameraman to pan to the boat on camera right. He zooms and pans right and shows the warship. If they had used green/blue screen the background zoom would not have matched the foreground zoom. Almost impossible.
Nonetheless at this point the cameraman needs to pan back to the presenter. A difficult shot to do accurately so what they needed was a cut-away which they can use to run over the dialogue and then re frame on something close to their original shot. The cameraman will then swing the camera back and reframe.
While this slightly clumsy exercise is happening the editor will use a cut-away (which in this instance was a zoomed in shot of the battleship though anything at a different size to the main shot would have done). And the viewer will see the presenter as in the original shot
So in conclusion the reason you know it's for real is because if it wasn't it wouldn't have been shot like this. Everything about it is authentic. Even if they did have the budget for a green/blue screen someone would still have had to shoot the background plate and marrying a foreground zoom to a background zoom is just way too complicated and expensive for news footage.
Bit of a trick question, that. She is likely to do better than he does in the multi-candidate debates. It's unlikely the polls will say 60-40 after R1. But even if they do, how can he seriously say at that point that he won't debate her head-to-head because he abhors what she stands for? Or what other reason might he give that doesn't haemorrhage support?
Here is why Marine Le Pen won't win the French election.
1. She's polling worse now than she was one, two or three years ago. There is no momentum in the FN vote share.
2. Even in 2015, straight after the most terrible Islamic terrorism in French history, when the FN was 5-6 points higher in the polls, the FN failed to win a single region. Even in Nord-Pas de Calais, where MLP herself was the candidate, she attracted almost no transfer votes. (She went from 40.6% in the first round to 42.2% in the second.)
3. In the 2015 Departmental elections, the FN was so transfer unfriendly they ended up with fewer councillors (62) than the Communist Party (121), or the Radical Party of the Left (63). Bear in mind this was a time when the FN was polling substantially higher than today.
4. Unlike UKIP, the PVV, or other insurgent parties, the FN has repeatedly underperformed its opinion polls scores. For example, in the 2015 Deptartmentals, it was expected to get 30-32% in the First Round and got 25.2%.
He zooms and pans right and shows the warship. If they had used green/blue screen the background zoom would not have matched the foreground zoom. Almost impossible.
Not for a second do I doubt that this is real and I can't believe this argument is still going on....BUT This statement isn't true anymore.
I was at a talk a few months ago were exactly this was shown in relation to some recent Hollywood films.
RCS1000--Word of advice-Think before you commit to print.Also it is MS who chooses to run this site.No-one forces him to & as such you take the brickbats as well as the bouquets.
I suspect that, before the evening is out, Tor and another username will beckon.
Just hinting about the stop digging concept, that's all.
The only way it could practically have been superimposed is by using a blue/green screen which because he’s full length would have meant that the screen was behind the boat. In other words it would have to be huge. A massive building job with a foreground boat in an exterior studio. The alternative would be building the skeleton of the boat around the person and shooting it in a green/blue screen studio which would be just as expensive and completely prohibitive for news footage.
This is the infamous CNN footage? Why couldn't you do it with a green screen just behind the reporter, and then superimpose him on the footage obtained from a camera on the boat?
Eddie Jones is a genius. He worked out how to beat that Italian chicanery. Some of the England stuff in the 2nd half was awesome.
Anyone who's watched a game of rugby worked out how to beat it after seeing it the first time. Pick and go.
The England players required a half time the talk to reprogram their brains. They managed to stick to the new script for a good 10 mins after half time then Care went of and Youngs froze in the headlights like he'd was totally surprised by the tactics.
If the opposition doesn't compete at the tackle you just pick up the ball and walk forward, it's not rocket science.
Except that the entire England team - skilled international players, grand slam winners, 2nd best team in world rugby - were entirely confused and bewildered by the Italian tactic. With all respect, I imagine they know even more about rugby than you.
So it wasn't at all obvious how to respond. But they got there in the end.
Anyway its a fascinating six nations. Some great games. I think Scotland will lose to England in a close match, but England will then lose to Ireland....
When England get their best players back they could be a match for the All Blacks. Maybe.
Come on Sean....The England captain and Haskell were having to ask the ref what the rules were...that is appalling. It is like Jimmy Anderson and Stuart Broad after 10 years of test cricket asking the umpire to explain the LBW law because they weren't sure if they should make an appeal or not.
Eddie Jones is the nuts though.
It's a tactic used by the chiefs in super rugby in the last couple of seasons and they have stopped doing it because it's been worked out. Not only that England defence coached talked about how they had a plan to deal with it during the autumn internationals when it was raised as a hypothetical.
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
So, you don't care for democracy if the result doesn't match the result you wanted?
RCS1000--Never said or suggested that you ignorant prat.
I would suggest it is you who are showing your ignorance. The regulars on this site know that every single person posting or writing a thread has a bias. I do and so do you. Intelligent people take the time to work out who does what around here and also what their personal views are. We also appreciate the fact they do all of this for almost no return and we cut them some slack accordingly.
Attack what Mike claims and if you want highlight his bias. Do not however insult the people who make this all possible.
Except for TSE of course. He deserves everything he gets
GeoffM-Not quite sure where you are coming from.Am I not entitled to an opinion.Plse clarify.Sounds like censorship to me.Tell me I'm wrong. Is this all because I love Hitler??
RCS1000--Never said or suggested that you ignorant prat.
I am sure rcs1000 would never stoop to saying "Do you know who I am", but do you know who he is?
"Do you know who I am? I don't know how to put this but I'm kind of a big deal. People know me. I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany."
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
But Leave didn't 'win', they won, just as England just won (rather than 'winning') that rugby match.
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
The referendum last June was just a spectacular drop goal in a match where the final whistle has not yet been blown.
The electoral reality for the government is that we must be 'out out' before 2020.
Things don't happen just because they're electorally convenient for the government.
The government serves A50 by March 2017. The two year negotiation ends March 2019.
Be very clear. Every bump in the road will be the fault of the EU and Remainers who cannot accept the result. Every single one.
No, it is much more straightforward than that. It is your fault for losing a referendum which my cat could have won for Remain. 60/40 leave/remain would be one thing; 52/48 is lazy, complacent, incompetent, apathetic feckwittery on the part of everyone from Cameron down to YOU personally.
If you can't accept that, please let us have an indication of the time you personally put into the Remain campaign in hours on the phone banks and on the street. To the nearest 100 hours will do fine. Thanks.
There is nothing in the footage.... [snippety snip] ...footage.
That's actually really interesting and a great expert rebuttal to bring this PB arc to a close. I'm grateful that you posted it on here rather than keep it by Vanilla.
I wish you'd post here more often on your particular areas of knowledge - films, etc - and perhaps less on the areas in which you don't know very much at all (everything else, basically). Cheers!
it reveals all the arrogance of the entitled 'chattering classes' - announcing that leavers must do the persuading, cajoling to convince him.
Compared to the arrogance of the Brexiteers?
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
Just a reminder Scott; Leave persuaded a million more people than Remain.
Brexit can't be executed against the will of the people. Those people will need to stay persuaded through thick and thin over the next couple of years for the Brexit coalition to hold together. Meanwhile the argument goes on, but the Brexiteers have abandoned the debate, preferring instead to crow about having 'won'.
So, we should have multiple referenda until we get the result you want.
Comments
A shrewd opposition could now play Brexit to their advantage.
The newly gained control of tax policy on imported products, the ability to replace aid with trade and the ability to build an immigration policy that both restricts numbers but removes the disparity between Europe and the rest of the world offer real opportunities to demonstrate forward thinking.
Clinging to last century positions on Europe is for those wedded to the past.
"We couldn't persuade you before, so now you must shut up and accept you were wrong?"
In the words of a fellow Brexiteer, "Fuck off. Please. Just fuck off."
https://twitter.com/matt9dawson/status/835887286948626438
Ohdearwhatashame.
My plan of waiting for England to annihilate Italy then backing Scotland (previously 9) for the title is looking considerably less cunning.
Remainers have been given the chance to negotiate our departure. Dave didn't want to, so now TM (Remain) is, and the country seem to love her.
UKIP are deadd, Labour are dying, whats the problem?
If it were a leaver in charge there may be some reason for the constant griping, but it isn't so there isn't.
Shows what I know.
Scotland must be rubbing their hands together.
The future is global.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/feb/26/bill-paxton-dies-61-aliens-titanic
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/834907463568732164
Paxton: only actor to fight all 7 classic movie monsters: an alien, a predator, a terminator, a vampire, a twister, a titanic, Willem Dafoe.
Or do they have an American coach handing out refreshments during the break?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/26/game-thrones-star-britains-tallest-man-neil-fingleton-dies-aged/
The extras on the DVD showed that two very tall chaps played the giants, and were doubled in size using computer magickery.
If one result is so disastrous for the country that the PM has to campaign hard against it, there should be no referendum. He was elected to make such judgements
Most people must know this, but they would lose imagined PB capital by fessing up, so don't admit it
And likewise Remain didn't 'lose', they lost a referendum which was theirs to lose all the way through. Brexit is YOUR FAULT.
In my experience talking to colleagues attitudes have hardened. If you were for in, you're just waiting for the mess to start.
The England players required a half time the talk to reprogram their brains. They managed to stick to the new script for a good 10 mins after half time then Care went of and Youngs froze in the headlights like he'd was totally surprised by the tactics.
If the opposition doesn't compete at the tackle you just pick up the ball and walk forward, it's not rocket science.
The question is whether we will be more free trade post-Brexit than pre-; I very much hope that we will, but am fearful that the world will slip back into protectionism (see the US Border Tax Adjustment).
Is there any path to negotiations on reforming the EU that doesn't pass through a far-right populist victory in France? Britgov certainly isn't in a position where it can go to Brussels and say "Hey, let's negotiate reform".
Admittedly it's not what things are called that counts most. But still.
Why is Macron's price going up? "Let's go Nordic" sounds so 1970s. And don't worry, no big problems that need solving. But safe and skilled hands! Who's going to vote for that outside of the Parisian state-sector middle class and its smaller analogues elsewhere? This guy is not going to get into the Elysée.
I haven't met a single person who thinks Macron will be able to hold his own in the TV debates against Le Pen. And the TV debates count far more than polls two months out, as the primaries showed.
20 Mar: TF1, 5 candidates
3 Apr: BFMTV, all candidates
20 Apr: F2, all candidates
23 Apr: round 1
then a one-on-one, surely (unlike in 2002 when Chirac refused to debate Le Pen père)
7 May: round 2
I wonder how pollees would answer on Macron-Le Pen if the pollster framed the question as follows.
"Who will you be voting for in the second round, if the candidates who win the most votes in the first round, and who then debate each other head-to-head on TV, are Macron and Le Pen?"
It's a constant source of cheer and it helps put a bounce in my day!
REMAIN 122
Be very clear. Every bump in the road will be the fault of the EU and Remainers who cannot accept the result. Every single one.
Worth the entrance fee to PB in itself.
That's something Remainers and Leavers agree on.
Disability benefits should go to "really disabled people" not those "taking pills at home, who suffer from anxiety", a key Theresa May aide says.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39097019
Eddie Jones is the nuts though.
There is nothing in the footage that gives me any reason to suspect it’s fake. What we know for certain is that it’s shot on a single camera and there are two tracks one sound one vision. We also know he was on a real boat and we have a good idea of the size of that boat. So the claim must be that the background scene has been put in afterwards.
The only way it could practically have been superimposed is by using a blue/green screen which because he’s full length would have meant that the screen was behind the boat. In other words it would have to be huge. A massive building job with a foreground boat in an exterior studio. The alternative would be building the skeleton of the boat around the person and shooting it in a green/blue screen studio which would be just as expensive and completely prohibitive for news footage.
What's more if they had done it this way it would have been done more professionally. At least two cameras and with proper cut-aways . So the first reason you know it's real is because faking it would have been impossibly expensive and would have had a different look and mor filmic look.
I imagine the reason people might think it’s fake is because of the awkwardness of the shot but that’s another reason why you know it’s authentic. It’s clearly shot with one camera on legs.
Near the beginning the presenter-in shot- tells the cameraman to pan to the boat on camera right. He zooms and pans right and shows the warship. If they had used green/blue screen the background zoom would not have matched the foreground zoom. Almost impossible.
Nonetheless at this point the cameraman needs to pan back to the presenter. A difficult shot to do accurately so what they needed was a cut-away which they can use to run over the dialogue and then re frame on something close to their original shot. The cameraman will then swing the camera back and reframe.
While this slightly clumsy exercise is happening the editor will use a cut-away (which in this instance was a zoomed in shot of the battleship though anything at a different size to the main shot would have done). And the viewer will see the presenter as in the original shot
So in conclusion the reason you know it's for real is because if it wasn't it wouldn't have been shot like this. Everything about it is authentic. Even if they did have the budget for a green/blue screen someone would still have had to shoot the background plate and marrying a foreground zoom to a background zoom is just way too complicated and expensive for news footage.
1. She's polling worse now than she was one, two or three years ago. There is no momentum in the FN vote share.
2. Even in 2015, straight after the most terrible Islamic terrorism in French history, when the FN was 5-6 points higher in the polls, the FN failed to win a single region. Even in Nord-Pas de Calais, where MLP herself was the candidate, she attracted almost no transfer votes. (She went from 40.6% in the first round to 42.2% in the second.)
3. In the 2015 Departmental elections, the FN was so transfer unfriendly they ended up with fewer councillors (62) than the Communist Party (121), or the Radical Party of the Left (63). Bear in mind this was a time when the FN was polling substantially higher than today.
4. Unlike UKIP, the PVV, or other insurgent parties, the FN has repeatedly underperformed its opinion polls scores. For example, in the 2015 Deptartmentals, it was expected to get 30-32% in the First Round and got 25.2%.
I was at a talk a few months ago were exactly this was shown in relation to some recent Hollywood films.
Just hinting about the stop digging concept, that's all.
https://www.ft.com/content/f9f3ffc2-fc1a-11e6-96f8-3700c5664d30
Clearly they forgot.
Was 9/2 anytime goalscorer with Paddy Power... MASSIVE RICKET
No wonder you love the EU.
Attack what Mike claims and if you want highlight his bias. Do not however insult the people who make this all possible.
Except for TSE of course. He deserves everything he gets
If you can't accept that, please let us have an indication of the time you personally put into the Remain campaign in hours on the phone banks and on the street. To the nearest 100 hours will do fine. Thanks.
I'm grateful that you posted it on here rather than keep it by Vanilla.
I wish you'd post here more often on your particular areas of knowledge - films, etc - and perhaps less on the areas in which you don't know very much at all (everything else, basically). Cheers!
Then the result is settled?
hmmm