...so in the real world, the slow progress in an amended article 50 continues
Astonishing that the Express can describe losing access to the Single Market as a 'victory'. All right - once the zealots seized control with their hard demands on immigration etc. it was never likely to be retained, but I'd have thought even they would term it a necessary sacrifice. A victory?
We will always have access to the single market, just not be a member
Mr. Patrick, must say, I still think Le Pen stands far less chance of winning than her odds suggest. The two-round system is handy for those not on the political fringes.
Indeed. I think she'll lose in the second round to that young smiley handsome empty suit Tony Macron. Poor France. Is Le Pen/Macron a worse choice or Trump/Clinton? It's tough being a voter in so many countries these days. Would you like crap or shit for dinner sir?
...so in the real world, the slow progress in an amended article 50 continues
Astonishing that the Express can describe losing access to the Single Market as a 'victory'. All right - once the zealots seized control with their hard demands on immigration etc. it was never likely to be retained, but I'd have thought even they would term it a necessary sacrifice. A victory?
We will always have access to the single market, just not be a member
Okay, okay. We might still have the same 'access' as Fiji or whoever - I'm just amazed that that is itself is now regarded as a cause for celebration.
...so in the real world, the slow progress in an amended article 50 continues
Astonishing that the Express can describe losing access to the Single Market as a 'victory'. All right - once the zealots seized control with their hard demands on immigration etc. it was never likely to be retained, but I'd have thought even they would term it a necessary sacrifice. A victory?
That may be the case, but everyone upto and including Dave and George told the voters many many times that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market, and they still voted to do it. The ideas that the voters didn't know what they were voting for is for the birds.
Meanwhile Mr & Mrs Smith at 29 Acacia Avenue think that they gave their vote, saw the result, shrugged, and left the politicians to get on with carrying it out. They will probably not notice the vast majority of this posturing on either side. If it isn't carried out, they will probably notice, and the consequence for political careers at the next election may well be unfortunate, or even regrettable.
But it's not going to be like that. We didn't vote for a cataclysm, nor for a new order, but for a huge mess that will consume all our political energies for the next decade or more. Even Acacia Avenue will have an opinion, even if it's just "A plague on the lot of them!"
It's a highway robbery by people we don't know because they were masked but they're smelly and their leaders are nasty opportunists who used them for their own purposes because they're ignorant and don't trust foreigners.
They've taken everything we value but we should accept it with good grace because there are more of them than us.
F1: no more running for Stroll (ahem) due to lack of front wing parts.
With just two tests of four days each, he's lost almost a quarter of his pre-season preparation time.
Not good for the youngster, but not unheard of to run out of some parts at this stage in testing. More worrying is another Honda engine problem, remember it's four PUs for the whole season in 2017!
Have had a read through the thread, I notice one dimension that is missing in all this.
No one has mentioned Labour's "owners" - The Unions.
I do not think the Unions will be keen on losing their political arm, especially given the amount they pay for it ...
Well they waste their money. Letting McCluskey select a leader is like the Christians in Rome choose between eaten by tigers or lions. His personal preferences - a left wing "socialist" candidate - appear to trump electability when it comes to choice. Anyone betting against McCluskey's choice of Leader in the last decade would have got rich.
If the Unions want to choose a Leader, they need to smarten up their act and modernise the way they choose one..
I have always felt that the Unions should focus on their members and be out of politics completely. I have always viewed the Union Payments as something akin to "Cash for Questions".
Unions focus on their members precisely by being in politics.
ISTM that they focus on their leaderships and activists not the members, who are just money pumps and cannon fodder.
For at least 2 Elections now (2010 and 2015) Unite have had polling showing that their members have voted for other parties more than for Labour.
I don't disagree with that. I was just pointing out that Unions believe that being political is in the interests of the members, but I'm not saying that they necessarily back the correct party!
I have a vague recollection that sometime in the 1970s the Fire Brigades Union asked to join the Liberal Party - but were told the party did not allow corporate membership.
...so in the real world, the slow progress in an amended article 50 continues
Astonishing that the Express can describe losing access to the Single Market as a 'victory'. All right - once the zealots seized control with their hard demands on immigration etc. it was never likely to be retained, but I'd have thought even they would term it a necessary sacrifice. A victory?
That may be the case, but everyone upto and including Dave and George told the voters many many times that leaving the EU would mean leaving the single market, and they still voted to do it. The ideas that the voters didn't know what they were voting for is for the birds.
Shhhh! Remainers can only keep their delusions going by refusing to look at inconvenient facts. Seeing that video could drive the weaker-willed remainiacs insane.
To sum up cyclefrees eloquent piece Labour should pack it's bags and disappear because she doesn't like their underlying ethos of tolerance and compassion
Ok, Roger - what's the Labour party for?
Who does it seek to represent and what does it want to do for them?
I could ask the same question of the Tory Party. The Labour Party doesn't need to have an overarching vision. In broad terms it favours the group to the individual. It believes in spending more on public services and financing it with a bigger contribution from those who can afford it. Who one can rely on to show compassion for those groups unable to help themselves and with an aim to redistribute wealth over a period of time.
Now give me the raison d'etre for the Tory Party?
To put what you have said about the Labour Party a little more formally -
To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.
@Cyclefree. Goddammit. You're giving me a complex. You write so well. Excellent article.
However, much as it pains me, I do agree with @DavidL. The hard Left (with their unlovely opposites on the Right) are zealots. They have faith. Faith does not admit reason. There is always the 'Other' to blame for defeat. Just as millennial cults are immune to the failure of prophecy, so the Left will always look for external scapegoats, including, at the last, the electorate.
Thank you.
I knew when I was writing it that I would be accused of naivety and over-optimism. I think Labour made a huge mistake choosing Corbyn. Having done that they have made more mistakes trying to get rid of him. So maybe they're stuck with him until the mistake finally works itself out at a GE. Plus it may give his opponents the courage to stand up for a decent Labour.
I may be naive but what I want more than anything is for Corbyn's poisonous ideas to be so utterly defeated that there is no chance of them reviving in Labour. They're a virus. Only when they go can a healthy Labour revive.
Labour now is like those pilots in the 447 flight from Brazil: about to crash, not really understanding why but incapable of doing anything about it.
I don't think you're guilty of either.
My politics are very personal (and doubtless fundamentally incoherent). My views are shaped by my beloved wife's cancer, when working-class-made-good me was suddenly confronted by the realities of life on PiP. We had resources; wealth and education, so we were fine financially.
However, I had an epiphany when I realised that the highest rate of PiP didn't even cover our hospital parking charges. There's nothing like time in an oncology suite for acquainting one with the realities of life at the bottom. I have no idea how people manage.
That's why I fucking resent Corbyn. He's destroying Labour's ability to oppose in any meaningful fashion and ensuring we have a Tory government until 2025 at least.
That is pretty damn amazing. Carswell's trolling has really got under their skin.
Sounds to me like Farage and Banks want to euthanize UKIP to clear the way for their new British Trumpite party. Decapitating Carswell is an obvious first step; after that Nuttall and the rest of the low-graders should be easily dispensed with.
I don't see much of a strategy behind this very public spat. If they want to take UKIP back it would be logical to attack Nuttall surely...?
I think Farage is enjoying being in US... Hanging with Donald and getting to pontificate on TV and in the paper when he wants... And trying to settle some scores.
If Douglas Carswell is no longer in UKIP, what exactly is left of that party? A few MEPs who are due to lose their jobs in two years' time and a handful of councillors who specialise in sexuality-based meteorology (and who may lose their jobs in an even shorter timeframe).
There's no need to deal with Mr Nuttall. He could quickly find himself an admiral without a navy. (Not that I am suggesting that Paul Nuttall has ever claimed to be an admiral.)
You left out Corbyns gutless altitude to the basket case that is Venezuala.Corbyn is very lucky that there is no appetite among his opponents or the MSM to ask him hard questions about why he and his Mexican wife never went to live in Venzuala after Chavez was elected or why he and his previous Chilean wife never went to live in Nicaragua elected a far left govt which Corbyn was a huge fan of
You left out Corbyns gutless altitude to the basket case that is Venezuala.Corbyn is very lucky that there is no appetite among his opponents or the MSM to ask him hard questions about why he and his Mexican wife never went to live in Venzuala after Chavez was elected or why he and his previous Chilean wife never went to live in Nicaragua elected a far left govt which Corbyn was a huge fan of
Basket case is generous. Babies are now dying of malnutrition in the country with the largest oil reserves in world.
Comments
Have taken a look at the LD/Tory swing at the last GE for England & Wales (Scotland is another country as they say, and NI of course is right out)
8.50% Mean swing
3.60% StDev
However it isn't quite a normal distribution - the skew is not so high (Median swing = 8.45%); but the tails are 'fat'.
46.07% 264 Within 1 SD
84.29% 483 Within 2 SD
99.30% 569 Within 3 SD
The SD for the
Con/LD 3.60%
Lab/LD 3.91%
Lab/Con3.25%
Swings were all remarkably consistent.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/28/sex-education-likely-to-be-made-compulsory-for-all-secondary-schools
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNnh-KhiLm0
407 71.03% 1 SD
547 95.46% 2 SD
569 99.30% 3 SD
9.55% Mean Swing
3.91% SD
The swing follows a normal dist better than LD/Con.
They've taken everything we value but we should accept it with good grace because there are more of them than us.
Unlike the protectionist France, Italy and Spain.
NEW THREAD
To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.
Or something along those lines.
My politics are very personal (and doubtless fundamentally incoherent). My views are shaped by my beloved wife's cancer, when working-class-made-good me was suddenly confronted by the realities of life on PiP. We had resources; wealth and education, so we were fine financially.
However, I had an epiphany when I realised that the highest rate of PiP didn't even cover our hospital parking charges. There's nothing like time in an oncology suite for acquainting one with the realities of life at the bottom. I have no idea how people manage.
That's why I fucking resent Corbyn. He's destroying Labour's ability to oppose in any meaningful fashion and ensuring we have a Tory government until 2025 at least.