English Local elections in May in English counties , a few Unitaries and Doncaster
Actual ( NOT NEV ) vote shares in 2013 ( 2014 for Doncaster )
Con 34.5% Lab 21.3% LD 13.7% UKIP 20.2% Green 3.4% BNP 0.3% Others 6.6%
and in 2009 ( 2008 for Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster )
Con 43.5% Lab 13.5% LD 24.7% UKIP 4.6% Green 4.4% BNP 2.5% Others 6.8%
Vote share in council by election results November to date ONLY in areas which have elections in May
Con 38.7% Lab 18.6% LD 25.1% UKIP 7.9% Green 2.9% BNP Zero Others 6.8%
These figures will slightly understate Labour and overstate Conservatives as the 6 month rule meant no by elections in Labours 3 strongest areas Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster .
UKIP are heading to lose 80% of the 147 seats they won in 2013 . They have already lost over 20 through by election losses and defections . FWIW my forecast for actual vote share this May in the English elections is roughly
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
There are now more than 30,000 deaths per year from opiate overdoses.
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
There are now more than 30,000 deaths per year from opiate overdoses.
Responsible for some declines in US female life expectancy I believe?
Excellent speech by Chris Christie from a while back. Spellbinding stuff.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I thought you voted UKIP because you wanted us to get close to a Powellite agenda where we didn't have 'wide grinning piccaninnis chasing us to the shops'?
Just keep saying whatever makes you feel good about yourself old chap
I do!
Better than tablets in the long run I reckon. Take plenty of exercise in the fresh air too
Strange word isn't it? Enoch never used it himself of course, except when quoting others
He was lucky falling into conversation with or receiving letters from all those anonymous folk from whom he could 'quote' without owning their terms himself.
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
It says that, and that there are people who'd vote Le Pen in the 1st round and vote Macron in the 2nd!
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
That is correct; an astonishing one in ten of MLP's supporters say they will only vote for her in the first round.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
English Local elections in May in English counties , a few Unitaries and Doncaster
Actual ( NOT NEV ) vote shares in 2013 ( 2014 for Doncaster )
Con 34.5% Lab 21.3% LD 13.7% UKIP 20.2% Green 3.4% BNP 0.3% Others 6.6%
and in 2009 ( 2008 for Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster )
Con 43.5% Lab 13.5% LD 24.7% UKIP 4.6% Green 4.4% BNP 2.5% Others 6.8%
Vote share in council by election results November to date ONLY in areas which have elections in May
Con 38.7% Lab 18.6% LD 25.1% UKIP 7.9% Green 2.9% BNP Zero Others 6.8%
These figures will slightly understate Labour and overstate Conservatives as the 6 month rule meant no by elections in Labours 3 strongest areas Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster .
UKIP are heading to lose 80% of the 147 seats they won in 2013 . They have already lost over 20 through by election losses and defections . FWIW my forecast for actual vote share this May in the English elections is roughly
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
There are now more than 30,000 deaths per year from opiate overdoses.
That law must be counterproductive? Shouldn't the law be for the Doctor to prescribe rehab?
Anyways, what is striking is how this epidemic is effecting the white rural population.
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
WTFF? Not doubting you, but I'd be interested to read the source of that. Astonishing fact.
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
That's exactly what it says.
Voting Le Pen as a protest in the 1st but not actually wanting her to win I can understand, with Macron it makes less sense.
Ahead of Mrs McTurnip's likely announcement today of SINDYREF2 because of BREXIT, the SNP government's own White Paper on independence pointed out Scotland being removed from the EU against its wishes three times was a reason to vote for independence - and still they were turned down:
Second, the Scotland’s Future White Paper. In November 2013, the previous First Minister and the present First Minister launched the Scotland’s Future White Paper, which was described as a ‘guide to an independent Scotland’. In that White Paper, the Scottish Government referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation opportunity’ (pages i and 556). Crucially, it also explicitly raised the prospect of a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU resulting in a vote to leave despite a majority of voters in Scotland voting to remain (pages 60, 217 and 460). In other words, although it explicitly highlighted the possibility of a majority of people in the UK as a whole voting to leave the EU while a majority of people in Scotland voted to remain, it still referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation’ opportunity, without any caveat or conditions with regard to future events.
English Local elections in May in English counties , a few Unitaries and Doncaster
Actual ( NOT NEV ) vote shares in 2013 ( 2014 for Doncaster )
Con 34.5% Lab 21.3% LD 13.7% UKIP 20.2% Green 3.4% BNP 0.3% Others 6.6%
and in 2009 ( 2008 for Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster )
Con 43.5% Lab 13.5% LD 24.7% UKIP 4.6% Green 4.4% BNP 2.5% Others 6.8%
Vote share in council by election results November to date ONLY in areas which have elections in May
Con 38.7% Lab 18.6% LD 25.1% UKIP 7.9% Green 2.9% BNP Zero Others 6.8%
These figures will slightly understate Labour and overstate Conservatives as the 6 month rule meant no by elections in Labours 3 strongest areas Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster .
UKIP are heading to lose 80% of the 147 seats they won in 2013 . They have already lost over 20 through by election losses and defections . FWIW my forecast for actual vote share this May in the English elections is roughly
Con 40 Lab 19 LD 23 UKIP 8 Green 3 Others 7
Going to be a bad night for Labour :^)
But they will spin that they have won the mayoralty elections....
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
WTFF? Not doubting you, but I'd be interested to read the source of that. Astonishing fact.
Foreign citizens employed by the NHS are by definition ALWAYS considering whether to leave.
So its more FAKE NEWS.
It's interesting that three-fifths have resisted all the scaremongering and aren't even considering leaving.
And for any that do decide to leave, there will be hundreds of qualified medical professionals from the rest of the world who'd welcome the opportunity to work in the UK.
So, we will replace EU-based medical migration with Commonwealth or wider migration. I suspect, to put it mildly, that this is not what the average Leave voter had in mind.
I'm not sure the average Leave voter cares too much about immigration of doctors and nurses.
The problems they have are with Romanian Big Issue sellers on benefits, of so many Polish plumbers that British plumbers can't earn a living, and of arranged marriages from Pakistan with people who don't speak English and prefer to turn certain parts of England into a mini-Lahore.
In other words, they want control over who is allowed into their country, they want the immigration of productive people that benefits the UK and don't want immigration of those who will be a drain on society or who want to change it rather than integrate.
If leave voters think Pakistan is part of the EU then they are certainly living up to stereotype.
The problem they have is with the "Right to family life" rules under the Social Chapter, that means we can't deport foreign criminals and ban arranged marriages from certain countries. Out of the EU we are free to make our own rules on these things.
No we aren't, that's part of the ECHR. Nothing to do with the EU.
A technical distinction which is lost on most people, who hear only "European Court" or "European Judges"
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referendum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
There are now more than 30,000 deaths per year from opiate overdoses.
That law must be counterproductive? Shouldn't the law be for the Doctor to prescribe rehab?
Anyways, what is striking is how this epidemic is effecting the white rural population.
There is a US lobbying group Patients for Pain Relief, or somesuch, that is funded entirely by the drug industry and which employs 1,300 lobbyists that goes round pushing states to make it easier for people to get painkiller prescriptions.
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they can block a second vote but they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referendum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
Exactly. But the SNP have form promising things not within their gift, not that they're unique in that....
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
You're not misinterpreting it. There's also people who will vote Le Pen in R1 and Macron in R2!
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
WTFF? Not doubting you, but I'd be interested to read the source of that. Astonishing fact.
Astonishing but not really news. Middle America has had a very very tough decade. Suicides, drug abuse, non-participation in labour market, food stamps, etc. You can see why Trump chose MAGA as his mantra.
Dupont-Aignan's book on his first 100 days as president seems to be selling well at Amazon: it's the no.1 pocket edition and the no.3 book on French politics.
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
There has to be an 'agreement' between the two sides - expect Mrs May to be not quite as trusting as Mr Cameron.....
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
You're not misinterpreting it. There's also people who will vote Le Pen in R1 and Macron in R2!
Are people lying the pollsters about that though?
You have to assume there would be at least some Shy Le Pen elements within those second round "abstainers".
I can see that rather than a 'we'll win easy' kinda day, it's going to be a 'you won't be allowed to have a referendum, SO THERE' one from the Brexityoons. Instructive.
The problem with this graphic from the FT is that it shows turnout falling by 28% between the rounds whereas the last time it fell was nearly 50 years ago.
Am I misinterpreting that, or does it say that there are people who'd vote Le Pen or Macron in the 1st round and abstain in the 2nd?
You're not misinterpreting it. There's also people who will vote Le Pen in R1 and Macron in R2!
Macron is the most popular "second choice" of Le Pen supporters. Basically, voters aren't very policy aware, and often vote on personalities.
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
There has to be an 'agreement' between the two sides - expect Mrs May to be not quite as trusting as Mr Cameron.....
A compromise would be to tell Scotland they can have another referendum after the negotiations when they can judge the deal Her Majesty's government comes back with.
But they can't just tell Scotland they're not having another referendum and that's that! If they try that it'll cause an explosion of rage north of the border.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
That's a rather selective bit of quotation - that article also says what I did, that at this stage (Jan 2016) he was on the fence. Maybe he couldn't see himself getting strongly behind Leave at that point, but changed his mind.
During the referendum campaign itself, May certainly put her career ahead of the good of the country.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
WTFF? Not doubting you, but I'd be interested to read the source of that. Astonishing fact.
Astonishing but not really news. Middle America has had a very very tough decade. Suicides, drug abuse, non-participation in labour market, food stamps, etc. You can see why Trump chose MAGA as his mantra.
I count 13 states from the map on that link which may have more than a prescription per person. Oddly all forming a contiguous block, and a lot of them are what I'd pejoratively call 'hillbilly states'
A compromise would be to tell Scotland they can have another referendum after the negotiations when they can judge the deal Her Majesty's government comes back with.
But they can't just tell Scotland they're not having another referendum and that's that! If they try that it'll cause an explosion of rage north of the border.
Ha ha, if the Scots could figure out how to export grievances they wouldn't need oil.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I thought you voted UKIP because you wanted us to get close to a Powellite agenda where we didn't have 'wide grinning piccaninnis chasing us to the shops'?
Just keep saying whatever makes you feel good about yourself old chap
I do!
Better than tablets in the long run I reckon. Take plenty of exercise in the fresh air too
"Give Scotland a different Brexit deal" indeed. Is Sturgeon the most irritating major politician in Britain?
I have to say, it's remarkable that questions are raised about Russian infowar activities in the US, France, the Netherlands and Germany, but in Britain we haven't had much more than the suggestion that they sent out a few tweets to affect the Stoke by-election.
"Give Scotland a different Brexit deal" indeed. Is Sturgeon the most irritating major politician in Britain?
I quite like Nicola. She's out to get the best possible deal for her country and for the people who elected her. Which is what you want your leaders to do.
Shame Westminster politicians haven't shown the same dedication to the people who elected them over the years. If they had we probably wouldn't have voted to LEAVE...
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
This has always struck me as "just so" story. Aside from being "obvious", and having nice narrative value, where is the evidence for it? Johnson does not seem to have expressed regret over the Indyref result. Leave campaigners have consistently said he seemed, to them, genuinely up for the fight. Even the fuss over that mysterious "pro-remain" newspaper column he drafted does not seem, after closer scrutiny, to bear out the story of a man who was secretly pro-remain while publicly pro-leave. He seems to have regarded his skeleton argument for remaining as utter dross.
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they can block a second vote but they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
All agreed that the last Sindy ref was to make a decision for a generation.
A generation is on average 33 years. So we should expect the next Sindy referendum in about 30 years.
Otherwise should the next early referendum see a vote for independence, the losers will seek a 'best of three'.
I don't know how aware people are of this, but the US has an extraordinary opiate addiction epidemic right now. In some US states, there are more opiate prescriptions than there are residents. In Tennessee, there is a law which states that if a doctor refuses to prescribe painkillers to a patient, he must refer them to someone who will.
There are now more than 30,000 deaths per year from opiate overdoses.
That law must be counterproductive? Shouldn't the law be for the Doctor to prescribe rehab?
Anyways, what is striking is how this epidemic is effecting the white rural population.
There is a US lobbying group Patients for Pain Relief, or somesuch, that is funded entirely by the drug industry and which employs 1,300 lobbyists that goes round pushing states to make it easier for people to get painkiller prescriptions.
The American relationship with drugs is completely screwed, with the constant bombardment of television advertising "Ask your physician for Vicodin/Tramadol/Prosac" and lobbying groups who make themselves look like NGOs and charities. You even hear rappers plugging their favourite prescription drugs of choice, whether opiates or stimulants. And yet people wonder why there's addiction problems in that environment.
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they can block a second vote but they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
All agreed that the last Sindy ref was to make a decision for a generation.
A generation is on average 33 years. So we should expect the next Sindy referendum in about 30 years.
Otherwise should the next early referendum see a vote for independence, the losers will seek a 'best of three'.
Didn't they put in a caveat "except if there's a major change in the UK's circumstances" ?
You can't get a much bigger change than leaving the European Union (even though I voted LEAVE I can't deny it's the biggest upheval the UK has seen since WWII)
Of course it's just possible that May has been keeping the idea of a different Brexit deal for Scotland up her sleeve and will deliver the goods...
I would not be surprised that in the end Scotland will be given more powers over her affairs in a deal that will satisfy the majority of Scots but still remain part of a semi Federal UK
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they can block a second vote but they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
All agreed that the last Sindy ref was to make a decision for a generation.
A generation is on average 33 years. So we should expect the next Sindy referendum in about 30 years.
Otherwise should the next early referendum see a vote for independence, the losers will seek a 'best of three'.
I think all would agree that its fa to do with you.
LOL, surely the best thing the media can do today is focus on the Commons and Lords, rather than giving jumped-up Ms McGrievance the oxygen of publicity she so desperately craves?
I've realised if we do get a second Indyref I'll be happy whatever the result.
If Scots vote to remain a part of the UK I'll be able to laugh at the Scot Nats.
If Scots vote to leave the UK I'll be able to blame the Leavers and warn them that Dave/Remain were right. Plus if Mrs May has any honour, she'd resign as PM, just as Dave would have done if the first Indyref had been lost, so George will become PM to fix the mess.
LOL, surely the best thing the media can do today is focus on the Commons and Lords, rather than giving jumped-up Ms McGrievance the oxygen of publicity she so desperately craves?
Perhaps there should be government oversight over the media making decisions about what they should be covering.
Plus if Mrs May has any honour, she'd resign as PM, just as Dave would have done if the first Indyref had been lost, so George will become PM to fix the mess.
LOL, surely the best thing the media can do today is focus on the Commons and Lords, rather than giving jumped-up Ms McGrievance the oxygen of publicity she so desperately craves?
Perhaps there should be government oversight over the media making decisions about what they should be covering.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
This has always struck me as "just so" story. Aside from being "obvious", and having nice narrative value, where is the evidence for it? Johnson does not seem to have expressed regret over the Indyref result. Leave campaigners have consistently said he seemed, to them, genuinely up for the fight. Even the fuss over that mysterious "pro-remain" newspaper column he drafted does not seem, after closer scrutiny, to bear out the story of a man who was secretly pro-remain while publicly pro-leave. He seems to have regarded his skeleton argument for remaining as utter dross.
Did you not notice his shocked appearance the morning after the result?
Doesn't Westminster have to pass a referndum bill for there to be one? Not sure Wee Jimmy Krankie can do anything of any relvance on her own - other than UDI!
I think Westminster does have to grant a referendum to Scotland but they can't deny the Scots another vote if they want one - Or rather they can block a second vote but they would be well advised not to try to block a second referendum if the Scots want it.
All agreed that the last Sindy ref was to make a decision for a generation.
A generation is on average 33 years. So we should expect the next Sindy referendum in about 30 years.
Otherwise should the next early referendum see a vote for independence, the losers will seek a 'best of three'.
I think all would agree that its fa to do with you.
Usual fingers in their ears SNPers around this morning, I see.
LOL, surely the best thing the media can do today is focus on the Commons and Lords, rather than giving jumped-up Ms McGrievance the oxygen of publicity she so desperately craves?
Perhaps there should be government oversight over the media making decisions about what they should be covering.
Err, no. They tried that approach in Scotland with Stephen Daisley and it didn't work out too well.
LOL, surely the best thing the media can do today is focus on the Commons and Lords, rather than giving jumped-up Ms McGrievance the oxygen of publicity she so desperately craves?
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
^ Why Remain lost, reason 3276
"Progressives" seem to hate the people of Hartlepool, for some reason.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
I do not for one moment believe Theresa May was a Remainer. All her instincts are to leave and through a hard leave.
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
^ Why Remain lost, reason 3276
"Progressives" seem to hate the people of Hartlepool, for some reason.
You can't trust the judgement of people that repeatedly elected Peter Mandelson as MP.
So another Project Fear Reality prediction comes true.
Or...sindy despite brexit...It was always coming given the massive gulf between the political leanings of England and Scotland. Sturgeon was always looking for a reason for another go.
I don't see much controversial in what Alastair has said. I would probably vote UKIP still even though our objective seems to have been fulfilled, there is always the worry that once you leave, the others revert to type. The facts is that every other party leader supported Remain, and the supposedly "Hardline Brexit" PM and chancellor are both Remainers. In Stoke, every other candidate was a Remainer etc etc
Think of other places where a regime has been overthrown, would the victors be happy with the old guard in place, promising to have changed? I wont give examples as they would encourage inane faux outrage and deliberate misunderstanding, but I am sure you can figure them out!
She said what she said is because she like most is not a principled politician, She believed Remain would win reasonably comfortably or at the very least, win.
On the other hand, I am not sure what Boris' feelings were. My guess is that he wanted a narrow Remain win.
My feeling re: Boris (based in large part on All Out War) is that he was genuinely on the fence before the referendum but cares about sovereignty, saw that the 'deal' did nothing, and couldn't bring himself to back Remain. Hence the initial 'I back Leave but probably won't campaign for them' followed by a realisation that this was a once-in-a-lifetime thing and you have to go hard or go home.
This has always struck me as "just so" story. Aside from being "obvious", and having nice narrative value, where is the evidence for it? Johnson does not seem to have expressed regret over the Indyref result. Leave campaigners have consistently said he seemed, to them, genuinely up for the fight. Even the fuss over that mysterious "pro-remain" newspaper column he drafted does not seem, after closer scrutiny, to bear out the story of a man who was secretly pro-remain while publicly pro-leave. He seems to have regarded his skeleton argument for remaining as utter dross.
Did you not notice his shocked appearance the morning after the result?
The Boris gameplan was transparently obvious: lead an honourable Leave campaign to a narrow loss and garner favour thereby from the more mental reaches of the Conservative party to position himself as the post-Cameron leader. Unfortunately the thick chavs of Hartlepool blew his plan up in his fat fucking face.
This has always struck me as "just so" story. Aside from being "obvious", and having nice narrative value, where is the evidence for it? Johnson does not seem to have expressed regret over the Indyref result. Leave campaigners have consistently said he seemed, to them, genuinely up for the fight. Even the fuss over that mysterious "pro-remain" newspaper column he drafted does not seem, after closer scrutiny, to bear out the story of a man who was secretly pro-remain while publicly pro-leave. He seems to have regarded his skeleton argument for remaining as utter dross.
Did you not notice his shocked appearance the morning after the result?
Eyewitnesses in the Leave team say he was pumped at the result. The result was a shock - accounts suggest Gove genuinely didn't believe they would win, too.
It is interesting that both UKIP and the Lib Dems haven't really moved much in the polls.
For all the hype, the Lib Dems really haven't made much progress in the polls at all. They've barely crawled up a few points since the EU referendum, and, worse, any progress they've made seems to have completely stalled since the New Year (after they got a bit of a lift following Richmond Park). They're only a bit ahead of where they were at this point in the disastrous 2010-15 parliament.
Of course, the picture of the polls is completely contradicted by the local council byelections week after week, so goodness knows what's really going on with them.
For all the hype? As far as I can see the LibDems have received very little.They get very little Press coverage and their Leader is regularly rubbished, both here and in the right-wing Press.
Like Labour, the LibDems have a leader problem. Unlike Corbyn, Farron is not hopelessly out of touch, does not hold views that are anathema to 80% of the population and is not utterly useless at leading, but he does not have a persona that commands attention. With millions and millions of voters looking on in bemusement at what is currently happening in and to the UK looking for someone to articulate their frustration, the opportunity is huge. It's tailor-made for someone like Charlie Kennedy or a pre-coalition Clegg, but the LibDems do not have that god dust anymore, it seems.
I think you are under estimating what the Liberals can do, if Corbyn stays in situ. 10% could easily become 20% in no time. Mostly, from Labour but a few from the Tories too.
With a strong leader, I suspect that the LDs would already be closer to 20% than 10%. Farron just does not inspire. If Corbyn is in charge in 2020, they will probably get my vote (if anyone does), but it's easy for me - I live in a seat that the Tories are going to hold come what may.
I think you underestimate the toxicity of LibDems to left of centre voters. It will take a generation before they will be forgiven for their role as 'the Tories little helpers'.
It is interesting that both UKIP and the Lib Dems haven't really moved much in the polls.
For all the hype, the Lib Dems really haven't made much progress in the polls at all. They've barely crawled up a few points since the EU referendum, and, worse, any progress they've made seems to have completely stalled since the New Year (after they got a bit of a lift following Richmond Park). They're only a bit ahead of where they were at this point in the disastrous 2010-15 parliament.
Of course, the picture of the polls is completely contradicted by the local council byelections week after week, so goodness knows what's really going on with them.
For all the hype? As far as I can see the LibDems have received very little.They get very little Press coverage and their Leader is regularly rubbished, both here and in the right-wing Press.
Like Labour, the LibDems have a leader problem. Unlike Corbyn, Farron is not hopelessly out of touch, does not hold views that are anathema to 80% of the population and is not utterly useless at leading, but he does not have a persona that commands attention. With millions and millions of voters looking on in bemusement at what is currently happening in and to the UK looking for someone to articulate their frustration, the opportunity is huge. It's tailor-made for someone like Charlie Kennedy or a pre-coalition Clegg, but the LibDems do not have that god dust anymore, it seems.
I think you are under estimating what the Liberals can do, if Corbyn stays in situ. 10% could easily become 20% in no time. Mostly, from Labour but a few from the Tories too.
With a strong leader, I suspect that the LDs would already be closer to 20% than 10%. Farron just does not inspire. If Corbyn is in charge in 2020, they will probably get my vote (if anyone does), but it's easy for me - I live in a seat that the Tories are going to hold come what may.
I think you underestimate the toxicity of LibDems to left of centre voters. It will take a generation before they will be forgiven for their role as 'the Tories little helpers'.
Rubbish. Huge numbers of voters by 2020 won't remember.
So another Project Fear Reality prediction comes true.
Or...sindy despite brexit...It was always coming given the massive gulf between the political leanings of England and Scotland. Sturgeon was always looking for a reason for another go.
How generous of the good folk of England to provide one. Thanks guys!
So Nicola says she wants the referendum between Autumn 2018 and Spring 2019.
The UK's negotiations with the will end March 2019 so that leaves room for Scotland to have a referendum after in April or May 2019 after they see what kind of deal we get.
Seems fair enough to me. HMG would be advised to accept that timeline.
Comments
Actual ( NOT NEV ) vote shares in
2013 ( 2014 for Doncaster )
Con 34.5%
Lab 21.3%
LD 13.7%
UKIP 20.2%
Green 3.4%
BNP 0.3%
Others 6.6%
and in 2009 ( 2008 for Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster )
Con 43.5%
Lab 13.5%
LD 24.7%
UKIP 4.6%
Green 4.4%
BNP 2.5%
Others 6.8%
Vote share in council by election results November to date ONLY in areas which have elections in May
Con 38.7%
Lab 18.6%
LD 25.1%
UKIP 7.9%
Green 2.9%
BNP Zero
Others 6.8%
These figures will slightly understate Labour and overstate Conservatives as the 6 month rule meant no by elections in Labours 3 strongest areas Durham , Northumberland and Doncaster .
UKIP are heading to lose 80% of the 147 seats they won in 2013 . They have already lost over 20 through by election losses and defections .
FWIW my forecast for actual vote share this May in the English elections is roughly
Con 40
Lab 19
LD 23
UKIP 8
Green 3
Others 7
You should be entering them in the obedience competitions at Crufts, Malc.
There are now more than 30,000 deaths per year from opiate overdoses.
Excellent speech by Chris Christie from a while back. Spellbinding stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdYMx7sycW4
I find that difficult to believe, to be honest.
Anyways, what is striking is how this epidemic is effecting the white rural population.
Are you looking forward to Nicola's moment to shine?
"The trouble is, I am not an ‘outer’." Boris
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/politics/news/59416/boris-johnson-rules-out-leading-eu-leave-campaign
Both Boris and May wanted to be PM and were willing to put that ahead of the good of the country.
https://www.twitter.com/europeelects/status/841244847155621889
Edit: it seems the figures were tweeted the wrong way round and have been deleted. In fact it's a Le Pen surge..
The top four on French politics are by
1) Anne Nivat (war journalist; I don't know whether she supports any candidate)
2) Jean-Luc Mélenchon
3) Nicolas Dupont-Aignan
4) Benoît Hamon
You have to assume there would be at least some Shy Le Pen elements within those second round "abstainers".
But they can't just tell Scotland they're not having another referendum and that's that! If they try that it'll cause an explosion of rage north of the border.
During the referendum campaign itself, May certainly put her career ahead of the good of the country.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-433497/Widow-Enoch-Powells-Rivers-Blood-speech-really-did-exist.html
I have to say, it's remarkable that questions are raised about Russian infowar activities in the US, France, the Netherlands and Germany, but in Britain we haven't had much more than the suggestion that they sent out a few tweets to affect the Stoke by-election.
Shame Westminster politicians haven't shown the same dedication to the people who elected them over the years. If they had we probably wouldn't have voted to LEAVE...
A generation is on average 33 years. So we should expect the next Sindy referendum in about 30 years.
Otherwise should the next early referendum see a vote for independence, the losers will seek a 'best of three'.
You can't get a much bigger change than leaving the European Union (even though I voted LEAVE I can't deny it's the biggest upheval the UK has seen since WWII)
If Scots vote to remain a part of the UK I'll be able to laugh at the Scot Nats.
If Scots vote to leave the UK I'll be able to blame the Leavers and warn them that Dave/Remain were right. Plus if Mrs May has any honour, she'd resign as PM, just as Dave would have done if the first Indyref had been lost, so George will become PM to fix the mess.
This is an interesting article on Theresa May.
https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n06/david-runciman/do-your-homework
Tarty McTartFace hectoring again.
Salmon wants his job back - she's spinning the plates to keep him at bay.
I predict a backlash against the SNP - the jocks are bored of referendums.
Oh yes indeedy...
It's the one after Section 29.
Massive if Scots vote for Independence.
(With Ladbrokes)
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/10/19/nicola-sturgeon-should-go-for-a-second-independence-referendum-says-alastair-meeks/
The UK's negotiations with the will end March 2019 so that leaves room for Scotland to have a referendum after in April or May 2019 after they see what kind of deal we get.
Seems fair enough to me. HMG would be advised to accept that timeline.
Well played.