Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
Yep - it does look like the government has no real interest in British citizens. It is interested only in the Conservative party.
Desperate stuff. I live overseas for most of the year and I want the government to pull security cooperation if a trade deal can't be agreed. I'm not selfish enough to put my own circumstances and choices before the good of the nation which may require the EU to learn a few lessons the hard way.
So, the lesson we will teach the EU is that we are prepared to increase our own citizens' exposure to danger. What lesson will that teach, precisely?
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top of the brief, in charge of events. Any implication she isn't or that she can't cope or she doesn't know what to do is poison for her politically and I suspect personally. She loves to be at the centre of things, in control, knowing everything (and certainly more than anyone else). She can't tolerate looking out of touch or looking unprepared. "Strong and Stable" doesn't look credible if the truth is she is dithering and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
Yep - it does look like the government has no real interest in British citizens. It is interested only in the Conservative party.
Desperate stuff. I live overseas for most of the year and I want the government to pull security cooperation if a trade deal can't be agreed. I'm not selfish enough to put my own circumstances and choices before the good of the nation which may require the EU to learn a few lessons the hard way.
So, the lesson we will teach the EU is that we are prepared to increase our own citizens' exposure to danger. What lesson will that teach, precisely?
There seems to be a strong affinity between Leavers, Le Penn and the Fascists and Trump and the Alt Right. If this is the dystopian future that Leaving the EU is going to lbring I hope we revert to 60's style protests and do all we can to bring this rotten edifice down.
If you want a vision of the future, think of a boot trampling a human face. Forever.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
Yep - it does look like the government has no real interest in British citizens. It is interested only in the Conservative party.
Desperate stuff. I live overseas for most of the year and I want the government to pull security cooperation if a trade deal can't be agreed. I'm not selfish enough to put my own circumstances and choices before the good of the nation which may require the EU to learn a few lessons the hard way.
It is becoming clear that the European Union is acting like an unfriendly power. If the member states back this stance, I feel no other option can be taken but to remove not only security intelligence, but also military support and the promise of support if under threat.
Yep - because that would have absolutely no negative downside for us whatsoever.
The extent to which some extreme Brexiteers are prepared to inflict harm on the UK and its citizens really is a wonder to behold.
@damienmcguin: German daily Die Welt: instead of preparing voters for pain of #brexit , May makes impossible promises to win anti-EU UKIP/Labour voters
Which 'impossible promises'?
She has promised voters that they will be better off than they are now; that she will look after those who are just about managing. She is going to deliver strength and stability. Let's see what happens.
May has not promised that in the context of Brexit - where she has said there may be difficult times ahead.
But of course
Brexit cannot be a success
The mask has slipped
How outrageous that someone should express such an opinion. Such opinions are not permitted. No-one must question the Supreme Leader.
So, the lesson we will teach the EU is that we are prepared to increase our own citizens' exposure to danger. What lesson will that teach, precisely?
Still stuck on the same loop, eh?
I think you need to step back and rethink the government position, especially in light of the recent hostility from the EU. As I said previously, the government doesn't give a shit about overseas citizens. We don't pay tax, we don't vote and we tend to irritate the locals. We are the most expendable group involved in Brexit.
The specific lesson, though, is that the government are prepared to do whatever it takes, nothing is off limits. Which is something the EU may need to learn the hard way.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
The EU did not double the exit bill. It was the FT that made an analysis that concluded it could be up to 100 billion Euro. No-one in the EU has mentioned 100 billion Euro. It is a totally confected row by Mrs May.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
Yep - it does look like the government has no real interest in British citizens. It is interested only in the Conservative party.
Desperate stuff. I live overseas for most of the year and I want the government to pull security cooperation if a trade deal can't be agreed. I'm not selfish enough to put my own circumstances and choices before the good of the nation which may require the EU to learn a few lessons the hard way.
So, the lesson we will teach the EU is that we are prepared to increase our own citizens' exposure to danger. What lesson will that teach, precisely?
Reciprocity.
And how do you think the EU will react when we decide to show them that British lives are expendable in order to teach them a lesson?
We have two polling cards for today's elections: a white one for the county council and mayoral elections, and a green one for the district.
Is this usual? As the elections would have been known about at the same time, why wouldn't all three be on one card?
Every election generates its own batch of polling cards. There are various groups of people who can only vote in some elections but not others, like peers, expats, EU citizens etc. so the run for each election won't always be the same (although two different local elections will be), plus the ward you are in may be different as county wards are sometimes larger. The poll card needs to show which election you are participating in.
This morning at 07:00 I was the first and only voter at my local polling station. I voted for the first time ever in a local election. (Tory) :-) As I was leaving I dumped into a very pleasant middle aged woman with an insanely waggly and friendly Labrador. Turns out she was the Tory candidate I had just voted for. We had a brief chat , including mentioning PB and her good mate John O of this parish (and the next parish over in Surrey).
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top of the brief, in charge of events. Any implication she isn't or that she can't cope or she doesn't know what to do is poison for her politically and I suspect personally. She loves to be at the centre of things, in control, knowing everything (and certainly more than anyone else). She can't tolerate looking out of touch or looking unprepared. "Strong and Stable" doesn't look credible if the truth is she is dithering and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Leaving aside yesterday's events, May's style of governing is starting to grow a little on me. The accusations thrown at her: for example that she did very little whilst at the Home Office, can actually be a good thing. Politicians sometimes meddle unnecessarily in order to be seen to be doing something.
Perhaps we have a PM who will react strongly but with due consideration to big events, but otherwise just leave things to get on with themselves?
It's a statement of fact. You seemed like a nice guy before. Since then you laid into Plato in very personal terms on several occasions, you've accused me of showing off when I cite my sources, and now you impugn my charitable motives.
I've no interest in any further conversation with you.
Plato laid into me as well, sometimes using similar nasty non-arguments to the one you just have (and worse).
Perhaps I haven't changed, and you're just not used to your arguments not being robustly challenged?
"you've accused me of showing off when I cite my sources"
Well, you continually claimed that you were not one of the establishment, and then talk (often the same day) about the figures of the establishment you've talked to. Worse, you use those conversations as 'evidence' for what you're saying.
"and now you impugn my charitable motives."
I know you do a lot of good work for charity, and I admire that. But that admiration is slightly lessened with what you've said over the Garden Bridge.
The Garden Bridge isn't charitable in my view. It's a tool for economic regeneration.
Lol.
Was an investigation done into whether the bridge was a better tool of 'economic regeneration' than any other use of the projected >£200 million cost, or was a similar process undergone to the awarding of the contracts?
As an example, the Millennium Bridge opened in 2000 and cost £18 million.
Your defence of the project has got increasingly ridiculous, hysterical and nasty.
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top of the brief, in charge of events. Any implication she isn't or that she can't cope or she doesn't know what to do is poison for her politically and I suspect personally. She loves to be at the centre of things, in control, knowing everything (and certainly more than anyone else). She can't tolerate looking out of touch or looking unprepared. "Strong and Stable" doesn't look credible if the truth is she is dithering and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker is now the EU Commission President not PM of Luxembourg
@damienmcguin: German daily Die Welt: instead of preparing voters for pain of #brexit , May makes impossible promises to win anti-EU UKIP/Labour voters
Which 'impossible promises'?
She has promised voters that they will be better off than they are now; that she will look after those who are just about managing. She is going to deliver strength and stability. Let's see what happens.
May has not promised that in the context of Brexit - where she has said there may be difficult times ahead.
But of course
Brexit cannot be a success
The mask has slipped
How outrageous that someone should express such an opinion. Such opinions are not permitted. No-one must question the Supreme Leader.
It's not a great opening gambit in a negotiation to say to the opposite party 'you must fail'.
Although reading your earlier post again I see you say there are two elections on one poll card - now that is unusual. The computer system they are using must be becoming more sophisticated!
@damienmcguin: German daily Die Welt: instead of preparing voters for pain of #brexit , May makes impossible promises to win anti-EU UKIP/Labour voters
Which 'impossible promises'?
She has promised voters that they will be better off than they are now; that she will look after those who are just about managing. She is going to deliver strength and stability. Let's see what happens.
May has not promised that in the context of Brexit - where she has said there may be difficult times ahead.
But of course
Brexit cannot be a success
The mask has slipped
How outrageous that someone should express such an opinion. Such opinions are not permitted. No-one must question the Supreme Leader.
It's not a great opening gambit in a negotiation to say to the opposite party 'you must fail'.
Nope - that is not what was said. Brexit cannot be a success is an opinion. Brexit must fail is a statement. They are very different things.
Elections need to be about character not policies - you can never predicte the decisions they will face
He clearly believes gay sex (although differentiating between that and homosexuality sexuality is classic Anglican sophistry @foxinsox ) is wrong.
That, for me, makes him toxic
Given the comparative records of Farron and May on gay rights, that does come across as somewhat tribally blinkered, I'm afraid.
Policy is different to personal beliefs - and beliefs can change over time. (I recall reading somewhere that May was instrumental in pushing gay marriage: Lynne Featherstone convinced her and then she ran with the idea, but have no idea if that is true or not).
That fact that Farron stumbled over "is gay sex a sin?" suggests that - at some level - he believes that it is. I doubt that May thinks about it at all.
For me, a PM who looks down on a large proportion of the population is unacceptable.
And how do you think the EU will react when we decide to show them that British lives are expendable in order to teach them a lesson?
How are we going to show them that?
And Juncker is President of the European Commission. The Remainer silliness phasers seem to have been set way higher than "stun" this morning.
Juncker has no power. None whatsoever. He is going to play no significant role in the negotiations. May has allowed herself to be riled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg and a no mark MEP from Belgium. And the serious stuff has not even begun.
It's a statement of fact. You seemed like a nice guy before. Since then you laid into Plato in very personal terms on several occasions, you've accused me of showing off when I cite my sources, and now you impugn my charitable motives.
I've no interest in any further conversation with you.
Plato laid into me as well, sometimes using similar nasty non-arguments to the one you just have (and worse).
Perhaps I haven't changed, and you're just not used to your arguments not being robustly challenged?
"you've accused me of showing off when I cite my sources"
Well, you continually claimed that you were not one of the establishment, and then talk (often the same day) about the figures of the establishment you've talked to. Worse, you use those conversations as 'evidence' for what you're saying.
"and now you impugn my charitable motives."
I know you do a lot of good work for charity, and I admire that. But that admiration is slightly lessened with what you've said over the Garden Bridge.
The Garden Bridge isn't charitable in my view. It's a tool for economic regeneration.
Lol.
Was an investigation done into whether the bridge was a better tool of 'economic regeneration' than any other use of the projected >£200 million cost, or was a similar process undergone to the awarding of the contracts?
As an example, the Millennium Bridge opened in 2000 and cost £18 million.
Your defence of the project has got increasingly ridiculous, hysterical and nasty.
Please don't respond to any more of my posts. I have no interest in further dialogue with you.
I will extend you the same courtesy.
You do know there's a 'don't respond' option you can take yourself?
Indeed, and that's what I intend to do. I was just being thoughtful in tell @JosiasJessop that so that he didn't waste his time
Charles, you often write some good, thoughtful posts, and I'll respond to them if I feel I can add something. Please feel free to do the same for any of my posts that may grab your interest.
It's a shame we've had to have a small falling out over something like the Garden Bridge. Hopefully with time you'll be able to understand what I've been saying for these last few years, and why.
';The EU did not double the exit bill. It was the FT that made an analysis that concluded it could be up to 100 billion Euro. No-one in the EU has mentioned 100 billion Euro. It is a totally confected row by Mrs May.'
Wrong, watch last night's Newsnight , the drivers of the new bill are France and Poland.
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker is now the EU Commission President not PM of Luxembourg
Leavers for Fascists is one of the more disturbing trends of 2017.
I hope no one gambled too much money on the running commentary on pb last night. The unwary might have been shocked to wake up this morning to find that Emmanuel Macron polled as the comprehensive winner:
My thoughts exactly, out last night, didn't see the debate so just had a brief look at the comments before turning in - Chestnut, Moniker etc were assuring us Macron was being slaughtered. Wake up this morning to find 63% thought Macron had won. Serves has a reminder how far to the right PB now is and definitely worth bearing in mind in a betting context.
And how do you think the EU will react when we decide to show them that British lives are expendable in order to teach them a lesson?
How are we going to show them that?
And Juncker is President of the European Commission. The Remainer silliness phasers seem to have been set way higher than "stun" this morning.
Juncker has no power. None whatsoever. He is going to play no significant role in the negotiations. May has allowed herself to be riled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg and a no mark MEP from Belgium. And the serious stuff has not even begun.
No role? Then why did he have the meeting with TMay in the first place?
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top of the brief, in charge of events. Any implication she isn't or that she can't cope or she doesn't know what to do is poison for her politically and I suspect personally. She loves to be at the centre of things, in control, knowing everything (and certainly more than anyone else). She can't tolerate looking out of touch or looking unprepared. "Strong and Stable" doesn't look credible if the truth is she is dithering and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker's salary is double May's. Not bad for a powerless irrelevance.
There seems to be a strong affinity between Leavers, Le Penn and the Fascists and Trump and the Alt Right. If this is the dystopian future that Leaving the EU is going to lbring I hope we revert to 60's style protests and do all we can to bring this rotten edifice down.
Roger - you can't have seen OGH Tweet:
According to Ipsos Macron leads in all regions of France except the one favoured most by British migrants - Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur
Motes & beams, old chap, motes & beams.....
I'm afraid your loyalty to your school chum is taking you to some very dark places. She is showing herself to have feets of clay (as my French friend calls the plural of foot)
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker is now the EU Commission President not PM of Luxembourg
So, the lesson we will teach the EU is that we are prepared to increase our own citizens' exposure to danger. What lesson will that teach, precisely?
Still stuck on the same loop, eh?
I think you need to step back and rethink the government position, especially in light of the recent hostility from the EU. As I said previously, the government doesn't give a shit about overseas citizens. We don't pay tax, we don't vote and we tend to irritate the locals. We are the most expendable group involved in Brexit.
The specific lesson, though, is that the government are prepared to do whatever it takes, nothing is off limits. Which is something the EU may need to learn the hard way.
You seem to live under the misapprehension that UK citizens resident in the UK do not visit mainland Europe.
@damienmcguin: German daily Die Welt: instead of preparing voters for pain of #brexit , May makes impossible promises to win anti-EU UKIP/Labour voters
Which 'impossible promises'?
She has promised voters that they will be better off than they are now; that she will look after those who are just about managing. She is going to deliver strength and stability. Let's see what happens.
May has not promised that in the context of Brexit - where she has said there may be difficult times ahead.
But of course
Brexit cannot be a success
The mask has slipped
How outrageous that someone should express such an opinion. Such opinions are not permitted. No-one must question the Supreme Leader.
It's not a great opening gambit in a negotiation to say to the opposite party 'you must fail'.
That is not how I read Juncker's comment. I do not think he was stating a goal - Brexit must fail, the EU needs it to fail, etc - I think he was stating what seems to him to be inevitable.
I read his comment as meaning that, given the number of downsides and their highly negative aspects, Brexit can only produce a bad outcome no matter what the outcome is. Not so much "you must fail" as "you cannot avoid the mess you are creating"
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will w
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
Yep - it does look like the government has no real interest in British citizens. It is interested only in the Conservative party.
Desperate stuff. I live overseas for most of the year and I want the government to pull security cooperation if a trade deal can't be agreed. I'm not selfish enough to put my own circumstances and choices before the good of the nation which may require the EU to learn a few lessons the hard way.
It is becoming clear that the European Union is acting like an unfriendly power. If the member states back this stance, I feel no other option can be taken but to remove not only security intelligence, but also military support and the promise of support if under threat.
Yep - because that would have absolutely no negative downside for us whatsoever.
The extent to which some extreme Brexiteers are prepared to inflict harm on the UK and its citizens really is a wonder to behold.
Actually I was an extremely reluctant leaver. The EU are now a hostile nation. They have declared that we cannot make a success of this negotiation.
Charles, you often write some good, thoughtful posts, and I'll respond to them if I feel I can add something. Please feel free to do the same for any of my posts that may grab your interest.
It's a shame we've had to have a small falling out over something like the Garden Bridge. Hopefully with time you'll be able to understand what I've been saying for these last few years, and why.
Although reading your earlier post again I see you say there are two elections on one poll card - now that is unusual. The computer system they are using must be becoming more sophisticated!
Just for clarity, I'm talking about the polling cards sent through the post, not ballot papers in the station.
The white card has both the Cambourne division of the county councils and the Cambridgeshire mayor. The green one has only the Bourne ward of the South Cambridgeshire District Council.
Since the cards are individually addressed, I'd sort-of expected them all to be on one card. I think when we've had them in the past, the county and district have been on the same card.
If anything else, this system costs twice as much in postage.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
I'm beginning to feel like the old man in "Cabaret" sitting in the pub garden when the Hitler youth kid gets uo and starts singing "Tomorrow belongs to me"!
To be fair, Twitter went bonkers over those Jeremy Cliffe tweets. The Remain camp didn't waste a second in putting the boot into the government. The FAZ reports were treated as gospel; the UK govt was in the shit.... Brexit was going to be a disaster. Blah blah..
Then May responds and suddenly it's all the UK govt's fault again.
If I were May I would've handled it differently. I would've simply stated 'I'm surprised M Juncker was able to remember it'... and ridiculed him for his alcoholism.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will w
And the EU unilaterally doubling the bullshit exit bill is a sign of what? A friendly ally? Since June 23rd last year the UK and the EU have been on opposing sides. Until you understand that the EU is as hostile to the UK as we are to the EU your posts here are worthless and one eyed. You view the EU with rose tinted glasses and see them as an innocent party when in reality they are no better than a protection racket trying to punish someone who has decided to stop paying up.
I do hope you now see why the government will pull security cooperation. The idea that they give a shit about British citizens overseas is naïve. If it gives the government an advantage then it will be used.
Yep - it does look like the government has no real interest in British citizens. It is interested only in the Conservative party.
Desperate stuff. I live overseas for most of the year and I want the government to pull security cooperation if a trade deal can't be agreed. I'm not selfish enough to put my own circumstances and choices before the good of the nation which may require the EU to learn a few lessons the hard way.
It is becoming clear that the European Union is acting like an unfriendly power. If the member states back this stance, I feel no other option can be taken but to remove not only security intelligence, but also military support and the promise of support if under threat.
Yep - because that would have absolutely no negative downside for us whatsoever.
The extent to which some extreme Brexiteers are prepared to inflict harm on the UK and its citizens really is a wonder to behold.
Actually I was an extremely reluctant leaver. The EU are now a hostile nation. They have declared that we cannot make a success of this negotiation.
This is now all in. I am serious. All in.
Nope, a powerless politician form Luxembourg has stated that he does not believe that Brexit can be a success. I am afraid that is not an act of war.
@damienmcguin: German daily Die Welt: instead of preparing voters for pain of #brexit , May makes impossible promises to win anti-EU UKIP/Labour voters
Which 'impossible promises'?
She has promised voters that they will be better off than they are now; that she will look after those who are just about managing. She is going to deliver strength and stability. Let's see what happens.
May has not promised that in the context of Brexit - where she has said there may be difficult times ahead.
But of course
Brexit cannot be a success
The mask has slipped
How outrageous that someone should express such an opinion. Such opinions are not permitted. No-one must question the Supreme Leader.
It's not a great opening gambit in a negotiation to say to the opposite party 'you must fail'.
That is not how I read Juncker's comment. I do not think he was stating a goal - Brexit must fail, the EU needs it to fail, etc - I think he was stating what seems to him to be inevitable.
I read his comment as meaning that, given the number of downsides and their highly negative aspects, Brexit can only produce a bad outcome no matter what the outcome is. Not so much "you must fail" as "you cannot avoid the mess you are creating"
Yes, that is exactly what he was saying -as the context of the remark and the translation of it make absolutely clear. But we should not let the truth get in the way at such times. Not when there is a war to fight.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
I think that is a perfect description of the current situation. Almost poetic in its imagery
Accurate nonetheless ...
Bread and circuses. Without the bread.
You think we can afford circuses? The people will amuse themselves with balls made of bundles of worthless sterling.
I have an image of what it will look like for the average British paypack post-Brexit.
Rather ironically, that is from 1923 Germany when 1 trillion Marks = $1
SO conjures up images of despondent Brits pushing wheelbarrows full of belongings along dusty tracks in Provence and Tuscany, weary refugees having been forcibly ejected from their villas.
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker is now the EU Commission President not PM of Luxembourg
And how do you think the EU will react when we decide to show them that British lives are expendable in order to teach them a lesson?
How are we going to show them that?
And Juncker is President of the European Commission. The Remainer silliness phasers seem to have been set way higher than "stun" this morning.
Juncker has no power. None whatsoever. He is going to play no significant role in the negotiations. May has allowed herself to be riled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg and a no mark MEP from Belgium. And the serious stuff has not even begun.
I initially though "powerless politician from Luxembourg" was you parodying a view which might in other contexts have been expressed by a Leaver. Turns out you mean it.
One of the best reasons for leaving the EU is indeed the Kissinger question - if I want to call Europe, who do I call? You are pretending to think that behind Juncker there are people to be taken more seriously - but who are they? As far as I can see, it's fuckwitted nebbishes all the way down, young man.
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker's salary is double May's. Not bad for a powerless irrelevance.
Yep - rewarding mediocrity is a big problem in the UK and the EU.
Not much worth staying up for there, most seem to be counting in the morning
I beg to differ!
Wrexham and Flintshire will have declared by 3am and will give some indication how the 4 NE Wales seats (and perhaps Wales as a whole) will go next month... I've got small bets on all 4 (Alyn & Deeside, Wrexham, Clwyd South and Delyn) turning blue. Not great odds, but I'll just be happy to be able to walk from the River Dee to the River Conwy through blue lands. (Not that I'd be silly enough to walk that far!)
Charles, you often write some good, thoughtful posts, and I'll respond to them if I feel I can add something. Please feel free to do the same for any of my posts that may grab your interest.
It's a shame we've had to have a small falling out over something like the Garden Bridge. Hopefully with time you'll be able to understand what I've been saying for these last few years, and why.
It wasn't you're views on the GardenBridge.
It was your personal attacks.
Ahem. You attacked me as well, including today. Bringing the illness I had last year into it is a really sick thing to do, and wrong.
You once accused me of favouring utilitarian architecture just because I said the bridge should have a purpose, and there is not many lower blows someone can swing at me.
I am angry about the Garden Bridge. Hodge's report (which you so carelessly dismiss) highlights the concerns I and others have had. Tens of millions of pounds of public money wasted for nothing. And it was all so obvious and predictable.
Yes, this is the fantasy of wealthy, right-wing Brexiteers. We will fight them on the beaches, we will never surrender, white cliffs of Dover, Land of Hope and Glory. It will win May a huge majority at the GE. And then what? Once we have walked out of the EU with no deal and inflicted massive harm on ourselves, what happens then? Boris will get to say lots of hilarious things about foreigners and the Second World War; we can wave Union Jacks. But after a bit that may wear a bit thin. May has promised us strength and stability. Those struggling to get by are going to be better off, she has vowed. Everything will change for the better. You never know, people might just remember those promises and ask what happened to them.
I'm beginning to feel like the old man in "Cabaret" sitting in the pub garden when the Hitler youth kid gets uo and starts singing "Tomorrow belongs to me"!
I am reminded of the old Italian in Catch-22 who Art Garfunkel (playing Nately IIRC) had a debate with. However I think he would really be on the EU side rather than the UK side
';The EU did not double the exit bill. It was the FT that made an analysis that concluded it could be up to 100 billion Euro. No-one in the EU has mentioned 100 billion Euro. It is a totally confected row by Mrs May.'
Wrong, watch last night's Newsnight , the drivers of the new bill are France and Poland.
So someone in the outgoing French Government expressed a desire that the UK funds post Brexit farm subsidies and the FT extrapolated that.
The FT also said " Estimates of Britain’s Brexit bill are highly variable because they include assumptions on Britain’s exit date, its proper share of contributions, UK receipts such as its budget rebate or EU investment spending, and the type of liabilities it is expected to honour. European diplomats consider this flexibility as helpful in reaching a deal."
SO conjures up images of despondent Brits pushing wheelbarrows full of belongings along dusty tracks in Provence and Tuscany, weary refugees having been forcibly ejected from their villas.
Its inevitable I'm afraid, all hope is lost.
Yep - fair point. Only very wealthy Brits ever visit or move to Europe.
Barnesian ';The EU did not double the exit bill. It was the FT that made an analysis that concluded it could be up to 100 billion Euro. No-one in the EU has mentioned 100 billion Euro. It is a totally confected row by Mrs May.'
Wrong, watch last night's Newsnight , the drivers of the new bill are France and Poland.
Perhaps someone can help old Stodge out here with the truth (or something near it):
I thought there were only two net contributors to the EU Budget - Germany and the United Kingdom.
If that is so, our departure will have a serious financial impact on the EU and some states which have hitherto either been neutral or small beneficiaries will have to become net contributors (with the domestic political impact that might or might not have). The alternative is Germany will have to pick up the slack and become an even greater contributor.
The "Divorce Bill" is clearly a way for those who will become contributors or who will have to become smaller net beneficiaries to have the bitter pill sweetened. It's analogous to a football team being relegated from the Premiership and no longer getting the media rights income they used to have but getting an interim "parachute payment" to soften the financial blow.
As to whether it's a bill the United Kingdom could or should pay, I don't have a view because I don't have sight of our contractual and other financial obligations. Legally, I imagine, we would have to meet so or there is a clause which allows us to break with a payment of some sort. To imagine we can leave without any kind of payment is naïve, to assume we have to pay for everyone else's dinner is equally foolish.
First prediction for the French parliamentary election
Opinionway for Les Echos polled Metropolitan France - which accounts for 535 constituencies out of 577 (the rest is 27 for overseas territories, 11 for French citizens abroad and 4 for Corsica) It combined the poll results with a sort of Baxter-like model taking into account results of 2012 and 2017 presidentiallections + regional elections of 2015 The model also gives a bonus to incumbents and estimâtes turnout at 60%.
les Echos did not give the poll resulst themselves but only the seats estimâtes, as follows:
En Marche - 249 to 286 [overall majority is 289] Républicains + UDI - 200 to 210 Front National - 15 to 25 Socialists + Greens - 28 to 43 Far-left (Mélenchon) - 6 to 8
They base this forecast on the following 2d round prédictions: - 90 to 116 EM vs FN - 180 EM vs Républicains - 46 EM / left (socialists or far-left) - 154 Républicains vs FN - 6 to 32 EM vs left - 32 three-way contests between EM vs Républicains vs FN
(all candidates getting 12.5% of registered voters in the first round are qualified for the second)
It seems very optimistic for En Marche (especially as nobody knows yet who their candidates will be and even who Macron wants to name PM or Minister), around the expectations for the FN, a bit below expectation for the right and beyond disastrous for the left.
FWIW a purely proportional national assembly based on the presidential first round with a 5% threshold would be: EM 152, FN 135, Républicains 126, Far left 124, Socialists 40
In truth, the bulk [of Mrs May's speech yesterday] is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top of the brief, in charge of events. Any implication she isn't or that she can't cope or she doesn't know what to do is poison for her politically and I suspect personally. She loves to be at the centre of things, in control, knowing everything (and certainly more than anyone else). She can't tolerate looking out of touch or looking unprepared. "Strong and Stable" doesn't look credible if the truth is she is dithering and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
I think you are on the money about May.
The EU consensus is that Brexit harms both sides (and therefore won't be a "success"). They want to ensure as much as possible of the inevitable damage falls on the UK side, not theirs. They don't want to stop us leaving. On the contrary they want us to get rid of us with the minimum collateral damage. They want a deal and they think they can call the shots on that.
We're the ones that need to keep the relationship going. It is also in the EU's interest, but maintaining the integrity of the EU is their first priority; Brexit damage limitation is also a priority; a relationship with a brexited UK not a priority at all.
SO conjures up images of despondent Brits pushing wheelbarrows full of belongings along dusty tracks in Provence and Tuscany, weary refugees having been forcibly ejected from their villas.
Its inevitable I'm afraid, all hope is lost.
Yep - fair point. Only very wealthy Brits ever visit or move to Europe.
'Yep - because that would have absolutely no negative downside for us whatsoever.
The extent to which some extreme Brexiteers are prepared to inflict harm on the UK and its citizens really is a wonder to behold. '
At what level would be exit bill have to be for you realize that the EU was trying to rip us off.
€300 billion?
Please recall, it was us, the UK, that started this whole thing rolling. I find it highly amusing that the Leavers have taken over Project Fear "We cannot talk to the EU. It will cost us trillions. Only Diamond hard Brexit can save us."
Time for some mangled Tennyson, methinks
Forward, the Brexit Brigade! Was there a man dismay'd? Not tho' the brexiteer knew Someone had blunder'd:
Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die: Into the valley of Brexit Rode the sixty million
@damienmcguin: German daily Die Welt: instead of preparing voters for pain of #brexit , May makes impossible promises to win anti-EU UKIP/Labour voters
Which 'impossible promises'?
She has promised voters that they will be better off than they are now; that she will look after those who are just about managing. She is going to deliver strength and stability. Let's see what happens.
May has not promised that in the context of Brexit - where she has said there may be difficult times ahead.
But of course
Brexit cannot be a success
The mask has slipped
How outrageous that someone should express such an opinion. Such opinions are not permitted. No-one must question the Supreme Leader.
It's not a great opening gambit in a negotiation to say to the opposite party 'you must fail'.
That is not how I read Juncker's comment. I do not think he was stating a goal - Brexit must fail, the EU needs it to fail, etc - I think he was stating what seems to him to be inevitable.
I read his comment as meaning that, given the number of downsides and their highly negative aspects, Brexit can only produce a bad outcome no matter what the outcome is. Not so much "you must fail" as "you cannot avoid the mess you are creating"
Yes, that is exactly what he was saying -as the context of the remark and the translation of it make absolutely clear. But we should not let the truth get in the way at such times. Not when there is a war to fight.
Oh dear - go and have a cup of tea ☕ or something stronger. Just read the whole thread. OTT or what.
The exit bill is hugely important to the EU because they are experts at kicking the can down the road. The EU is facing troubling times at present and the last thing it needs is the smaller nations crying foul at the next budget summit.
They can avoid telling the likes of Poland* they'll be getting less money if they can get an enormous amount of exit money from the UK to see them through the next five years.
*I'm not picking on Poland unfairly. The Polish economy gets no favours from Shengen. The Polish economy loses a swathe of its young, ambitious, educated workforce through migration to the richer nations. This drives down the working class wages here and leaves a hole to be filled in the Polish economy through EU funding. Not an efficient long-term system in my view.
My thoughts exactly, out last night, didn't see the debate so just had a brief look at the comments before turning in - Chestnut, Moniker etc were assuring us Macron was being slaughtered. Wake up this morning to find 63% thought Macron had won. Serves has a reminder how far to the right PB now is and definitely worth bearing in mind in a betting context.
Le Pen won more than one in five French votes the other day. She may win two in five on Sunday. Let that sink in.
She is much further ahead than Farage and co ever achieved over here in a mainstream election and France is drifting to the extremes.
Macron polled just 24% - the second worst polling in a primary in over sixty years. He's the default, 'oh I suppose he'll have to do' candidate rather than someone possessing a compelling vision.
Approximately seven weeks ago, Rutte won the Dutch election - but his coalition was absolutely hammered, just like the two main French parties. Wilders, who lost, actually gained. The Dutch are, I believe, still without a coalition.
Europe is gradually coming apart with it's splintered electorates, with the inflexibility and inability to reform the EU being the key reason.
Macron seems to be a nothing candidate serving up vacuous Blairite tripe. That isn't advocating for Le Pen, it's recognising that they appear to have an appalling choice that will neither help France or Europe.
And how do you think the EU will react when we decide to show them that British lives are expendable in order to teach them a lesson?
How are we going to show them that?
And Juncker is President of the European Commission. The Remainer silliness phasers seem to have been set way higher than "stun" this morning.
Juncker has no power. None whatsoever. He is going to play no significant role in the negotiations. May has allowed herself to be riled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg and a no mark MEP from Belgium. And the serious stuff has not even begun.
I initially though "powerless politician from Luxembourg" was you parodying a view which might in other contexts have been expressed by a Leaver. Turns out you mean it.
One of the best reasons for leaving the EU is indeed the Kissinger question - if I want to call Europe, who do I call? You are pretending to think that behind Juncker there are people to be taken more seriously - but who are they? As far as I can see, it's fuckwitted nebbishes all the way down, young man.
In terms of EU institution politicians, Tusk is the one with more authority, he is chosen directly by member state leaders, whereas Juncker was foisted upon them. The European Council is more important when it comes to big decisions like Brexit, and recent years have seen a big move towards the Council over the Commission in terms of 'who calls the shots'. I wouldn't describe Juncker as powerless but I do take whatever Tusk says a lot more seriously than Juncker or others (and so far he has also been the most measured of them in his responses - the good cop to Juncker's bad cop perhaps).
Although reading your earlier post again I see you say there are two elections on one poll card - now that is unusual. The computer system they are using must be becoming more sophisticated!
Just for clarity, I'm talking about the polling cards sent through the post, not ballot papers in the station.
The white card has both the Cambourne division of the county councils and the Cambridgeshire mayor. The green one has only the Bourne ward of the South Cambridgeshire District Council.
Since the cards are individually addressed, I'd sort-of expected them all to be on one card. I think when we've had them in the past, the county and district have been on the same card.
If anything else, this system costs twice as much in postage.
Probably a very mundane explanation that the computer can only cope with two elections on one card?
Well I have been surprised catching up with some of the comments on here about the European hoo haa.
Firstly I cannot see how it can be argued that the unattributed comments were not designed to influence the British Election. TM is having the election to get a strong supporting mandate. The weaker her support the stronger the EU will be in the negotiations. Now common sense here would be that this is so obvious that it must have been meant for the German elections but I don't buy this binary view. You can try and influence two constituencies at once.
Secondly Juncker has never come across a problem that was not solved by more Europe, so are we surprised that he doesn't see eye to eye with our government. Some of the positions that have been coming from probably Juncker and his cabal rather than Barnier, are so pro European that it wouldn't wash with the electorate so no UK leader could back it.
Finally and a technicality but when Juncker's aide talks of how Brexit cannot be a success, I think leavers are mistranslating this (I did a German degree many years ago). It is not that Brexit will not be allowed to be a success, but rather that Brexit, as a loss of a country from the EU bloc will not be a success for Europe. That said there are certainly people on both sides who I think would want the negotiations to fail, I just don't think that this includes Key players such as May, or Barnier. May's actions yesterday can probably be attributed to a free hit. (Call out Eurocrats like Juncker and stab him in the front rather than the back, motivate turnout among base for local elections which are much more bedrock support focused, use the politics free BBC local election day to avoid criticism from biggest EU advocate in the media, and lose criticism into Sunday at earliest due to local election results.)
And how do you think the EU will react when we decide to show them that British lives are expendable in order to teach them a lesson?
How are we going to show them that?
And Juncker is President of the European Commission. The Remainer silliness phasers seem to have been set way higher than "stun" this morning.
Juncker has no power. None whatsoever. He is going to play no significant role in the negotiations. May has allowed herself to be riled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg and a no mark MEP from Belgium. And the serious stuff has not even begun.
No role? Then why did he have the meeting with TMay in the first place?
Unfortunately Juncker is both powerful and has an agenda. If you step back and look at it on a pure negotiation point of view then you would want to minimise his influence, as he is dogmatic, and is incapable of seeing the British point of view, hence the living in another galaxy comment. Compared to the average person in the UK I am fairly sure the one living in another galaxy is Juncker.
In fairness to Cameron, he knew how poorly someone like Junkcer would come across to the British public, and tried to stop his appointment.
The exit bill is hugely important to the EU because they are experts at kicking the can down the road. The EU is facing troubling times at present and the last thing it needs is the smaller nations crying foul at the next budget summit.
They can avoid telling the likes of Poland* they'll be getting less money if they can get an enormous amount of exit money from the UK to see them through the next five years.
*I'm not picking on Poland unfairly. The Polish economy gets no favours from Shengen. The Polish economy loses a swathe of its young, ambitious, educated workforce through migration to the richer nations. This drives down the working class wages here and leaves a hole to be filled in the Polish economy through EU funding. Not an efficient long-term system in my view.
It is not that simple........ the idea that the EU are experts at kicking the can down the road is a perception only. The UK is the party that prevaricated for 10 months before signing A50, then May promptly puts another delay in the form of a potentially unnecessary election, so actually it will be 13 months before real negotiation (all due to UK posturing) handouts arent that simple - money has to be matched in country and comes with strings etc.. (just ask the Welsh and Cornish) - Poles like Shengen, after 40 years of Communism they love freedoms that we perhaps take for granted.
First prediction for the French parliamentary election
Opinionway for Les Echos polled Metropolitan France - which accounts for 535 constituencies out of 577 (the rest is 27 for overseas territories, 11 for French citizens abroad and 4 for Corsica) It combined the poll results with a sort of Baxter-like model taking into account results of 2012 and 2017 presidentiallections + regional elections of 2015 The model also gives a bonus to incumbents and estimâtes turnout at 60%.
les Echos did not give the poll resulst themselves but only the seats estimâtes, as follows:
En Marche - 249 to 286 [overall majority is 289] Républicains + UDI - 200 to 210 Front National - 15 to 25 Socialists + Greens - 28 to 43 Far-left (Mélenchon) - 6 to 8
They base this forecast on the following 2d round prédictions: - 90 to 116 EM vs FN - 180 EM vs Républicains - 46 EM / left (socialists or far-left) - 154 Républicains vs FN - 6 to 32 EM vs left - 32 three-way contests between EM vs Républicains vs FN
(all candidates getting 12.5% of registered voters in the first round are qualified for the second)
It seems very optimistic for En Marche (especially as nobody knows yet who their candidates will be and even who Macron wants to name PM or Minister), around the expectations for the FN, a bit below expectation for the right and beyond disastrous for the left.
FWIW a purely proportional national assembly based on the presidential first round with a 5% threshold would be: EM 152, FN 135, Républicains 126, Far left 124, Socialists 40
That seems very optimistic for EM. If that is based on the previous tradition of rallying around the new president to give them their mandate in parliament, it could explain the high projections. I doubt it would be the same this time in such a 4 way divided electorate.
I think the republicans will be the largest party - they were on course to win this election comfortably until Fillon's issues surfaced - I don't think that will tar the rest of the party in parliamentary elections.
The UK doesn't mind, indeed, it should want, the EU to be a success. The EU does not want the UK to be a success outside the EU.
In terms of pure interests, disregarding the personalities and national electorates involved, the UK is better disposed to the EU than vice versa.
But, we're still in the electioneering phase. I do wonder if May has overdone it. That said, criticism of her from people who had no problem with a £100bn bill being whispered or comments on Gibraltar/Northern Ireland is an exercise in double standards.
I think that's quite perceptive on the asymmetry of objectives in the negotiations.
On topic I do think the Conservatives have got to be a bit wary as to peak support. Voting Labour is seemingly not going to cost anyone at this election, which is why TM has been wise to tie the election to Brexit, as it gives people a different reason to turn out and vote Tory.
The biggest surprise to me has been how unsuccessful the Lib Dems have been turning the 48% into support for them. However I think this could be down to a couple of things. Firstly whilst there are some very pro EU voices on here, and on social media, I am not sure how much of the electorate they actually represent, and probably even more relevant how apt the Lib Dems are to take advantage. I live in SW former Lib Dem constituency but have not met anyone who seems to want to change there voting intention. In my constituency there are more UKIP voters to squeeze than labour voters. Secondly it's down to democracy and fairness. I cannot be the only Lib Dem voter who voted remain, but would like the result of a strongly supported national referendum to be respected. It has certainly reduced my likelihood to vote in what should be a strong target.
Local elections, what turn out 30%. Normally made up of 20 -25% who vote by post, so yesterdays moronic outburst by the Prtime Minister will have little or any effect on those polls, I submit.
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
Yep - the PM allowed herself to be rattled by a powerless politician from Luxembourg who will play little or no role in the Brexit negotiations. That's how good she is at being strong and stable.
Juncker is now the EU Commission President not PM of Luxembourg
Comments
Another extraordinary day yesterday culminating in Theresa May's speech outside No.10. There's nothing new in Prime Ministers using the backdrop of their house for a bit of shameless electioneering - in fact I can't think of one who hasn't at some point.
I also decided to read the speech rather than watch it with all the visual overtones. In truth, the bulk is the same rehashed platitudes. Nothing wrong with that - that's how elections work, just keep repeating the same messages - the one about how all the non-Conservative parties will join with Corbyn is hilarious and her messianic self-belief worrying and intriguing.
The first quarter of the speech is extraordinary. It's clear the leak of the dinner with Juncker has angered her politically but I think more personally. It's not the fact of the leak that's the problem - that's politics and had the tweets shown May to be defiant and hostile that would be fine.
The problem is the tweets don't convey a message of defiance but dithering - the damning part is the sense May and the Government don't know what they are doing and are struggling with some of what Juncker considers the basic concepts. It's that allegation of incompetence that cuts May to the bone - being opposed and confident in that opposition is one thing but looking as ill-prepared and naïve as Corbyn's Labour Party drags May and her team down several levels.
Here's the thing - May, apart from her Britannia complex, loves to look in control, to be on top of the brief, in charge of events. Any implication she isn't or that she can't cope or she doesn't know what to do is poison for her politically and I suspect personally. She loves to be at the centre of things, in control, knowing everything (and certainly more than anyone else). She can't tolerate looking out of touch or looking unprepared. "Strong and Stable" doesn't look credible if the truth is she is dithering and uncertain.
The riposte has been almost child-like, "the nasty Europeans are out to get me". If the truth of the events (and no one seems to question the veracity of the account of the meeting) reveals where the EU think we are, May's speech reveals where she thinks the EU are or is.
The notion the EU would prefer a period of political instability is absurd as is the notion somehow that the EU would think anything they could do would make any difference at all. Indeed, I'm sure the EU know any attempt by them to interfere would be as successful as Obama's intervention was in last year's Referendum.
The extent to which some extreme Brexiteers are prepared to inflict harm on the UK and its citizens really is a wonder to behold.
Is this usual? As the elections would have been known about at the same time, why wouldn't all three be on one card?
Well, at least we have F1 to keep us sane.
I think you need to step back and rethink the government position, especially in light of the recent hostility from the EU. As I said previously, the government doesn't give a shit about overseas citizens. We don't pay tax, we don't vote and we tend to irritate the locals. We are the most expendable group involved in Brexit.
The specific lesson, though, is that the government are prepared to do whatever it takes, nothing is off limits. Which is something the EU may need to learn the hard way.
As I was leaving I dumped into a very pleasant middle aged woman with an insanely waggly and friendly Labrador. Turns out she was the Tory candidate I had just voted for. We had a brief chat , including mentioning PB and her good mate John O of this parish (and the next parish over in Surrey).
Perhaps we have a PM who will react strongly but with due consideration to big events, but otherwise just leave things to get on with themselves?
Time will tell.
"British lives are expendable"
Too much hyperbole, too early in the morning.
http://election.pressassociation.com/Declaration_times/all_2017_by_time.php
If anyone but Labour gets in in my ward, you can officially cremate the party.
And Juncker is President of the European Commission. The Remainer silliness phasers seem to have been set way higher than "stun" this morning.
That fact that Farron stumbled over "is gay sex a sin?" suggests that - at some level - he believes that it is. I doubt that May thinks about it at all.
For me, a PM who looks down on a large proportion of the population is unacceptable.
It's a shame we've had to have a small falling out over something like the Garden Bridge. Hopefully with time you'll be able to understand what I've been saying for these last few years, and why.
';The EU did not double the exit bill. It was the FT that made an analysis that concluded it could be up to 100 billion Euro. No-one in the EU has mentioned 100 billion Euro. It is a totally confected row by Mrs May.'
Wrong, watch last night's Newsnight , the drivers of the new bill are France and Poland.
No role? Then why did he have the meeting with TMay in the first place?
I read his comment as meaning that, given the number of downsides and their highly negative aspects, Brexit can only produce a bad outcome no matter what the outcome is. Not so much "you must fail" as "you cannot avoid the mess you are creating"
This is now all in. I am serious. All in.
It was your personal attacks.
The white card has both the Cambourne division of the county councils and the Cambridgeshire mayor. The green one has only the Bourne ward of the South Cambridgeshire District Council.
Since the cards are individually addressed, I'd sort-of expected them all to be on one card. I think when we've had them in the past, the county and district have been on the same card.
If anything else, this system costs twice as much in postage.
Then May responds and suddenly it's all the UK govt's fault again.
If I were May I would've handled it differently. I would've simply stated 'I'm surprised M Juncker was able to remember it'... and ridiculed him for his alcoholism.
Rather ironically, that is from 1923 Germany when 1 trillion Marks = $1
Its inevitable I'm afraid, all hope is lost.
One of the best reasons for leaving the EU is indeed the Kissinger question - if I want to call Europe, who do I call? You are pretending to think that behind Juncker there are people to be taken more seriously - but who are they? As far as I can see, it's fuckwitted nebbishes all the way down, young man.
Wrexham and Flintshire will have declared by 3am and will give some indication how the 4 NE Wales seats (and perhaps Wales as a whole) will go next month... I've got small bets on all 4 (Alyn & Deeside, Wrexham, Clwyd South and Delyn) turning blue. Not great odds, but I'll just be happy to be able to walk from the River Dee to the River Conwy through blue lands. (Not that I'd be silly enough to walk that far!)
"It takes a lot to turn me sans-culotte before breakfast, but really..."
Bravo!
You once accused me of favouring utilitarian architecture just because I said the bridge should have a purpose, and there is not many lower blows someone can swing at me.
I am angry about the Garden Bridge. Hodge's report (which you so carelessly dismiss) highlights the concerns I and others have had. Tens of millions of pounds of public money wasted for nothing. And it was all so obvious and predictable.
Can't understand a word they're saying
'Yep - because that would have absolutely no negative downside for us whatsoever.
The extent to which some extreme Brexiteers are prepared to inflict harm on the UK and its citizens really is a wonder to behold. '
At what level would be exit bill have to be for you realize that the EU was trying to rip us off.
€300 billion?
The FT also said " Estimates of Britain’s Brexit bill are highly variable because they include assumptions on Britain’s exit date, its proper share of contributions, UK receipts such as its budget rebate or EU investment spending, and the type of liabilities it is expected to honour. European diplomats consider this flexibility as helpful in reaching a deal."
No-one in the EU has mentioned 100 billion Euro.
I thought there were only two net contributors to the EU Budget - Germany and the United Kingdom.
If that is so, our departure will have a serious financial impact on the EU and some states which have hitherto either been neutral or small beneficiaries will have to become net contributors (with the domestic political impact that might or might not have). The alternative is Germany will have to pick up the slack and become an even greater contributor.
The "Divorce Bill" is clearly a way for those who will become contributors or who will have to become smaller net beneficiaries to have the bitter pill sweetened. It's analogous to a football team being relegated from the Premiership and no longer getting the media rights income they used to have but getting an interim "parachute payment" to soften the financial blow.
As to whether it's a bill the United Kingdom could or should pay, I don't have a view because I don't have sight of our contractual and other financial obligations. Legally, I imagine, we would have to meet so or there is a clause which allows us to break with a payment of some sort. To imagine we can leave without any kind of payment is naïve, to assume we have to pay for everyone else's dinner is equally foolish.
Opinionway for Les Echos polled Metropolitan France - which accounts for 535 constituencies out of 577 (the rest is 27 for overseas territories, 11 for French citizens abroad and 4 for Corsica)
It combined the poll results with a sort of Baxter-like model taking into account results of 2012 and 2017 presidentiallections + regional elections of 2015
The model also gives a bonus to incumbents and estimâtes turnout at 60%.
les Echos did not give the poll resulst themselves but only the seats estimâtes, as follows:
En Marche - 249 to 286 [overall majority is 289]
Républicains + UDI - 200 to 210
Front National - 15 to 25
Socialists + Greens - 28 to 43
Far-left (Mélenchon) - 6 to 8
They base this forecast on the following 2d round prédictions:
- 90 to 116 EM vs FN
- 180 EM vs Républicains
- 46 EM / left (socialists or far-left)
- 154 Républicains vs FN
- 6 to 32 EM vs left
- 32 three-way contests between EM vs Républicains vs FN
(all candidates getting 12.5% of registered voters in the first round are qualified for the second)
It seems very optimistic for En Marche (especially as nobody knows yet who their candidates will be and even who Macron wants to name PM or Minister), around the expectations for the FN, a bit below expectation for the right and beyond disastrous for the left.
FWIW a purely proportional national assembly based on the presidential first round with a 5% threshold would be: EM 152, FN 135, Républicains 126, Far left 124, Socialists 40
https://twitter.com/Cartoon4sale/status/860050693004161024
The EU consensus is that Brexit harms both sides (and therefore won't be a "success"). They want to ensure as much as possible of the inevitable damage falls on the UK side, not theirs. They don't want to stop us leaving. On the contrary they want us to get rid of us with the minimum collateral damage. They want a deal and they think they can call the shots on that.
We're the ones that need to keep the relationship going. It is also in the EU's interest, but maintaining the integrity of the EU is their first priority; Brexit damage limitation is also a priority; a relationship with a brexited UK not a priority at all.
There may be a great political future ahead for you.
Time for some mangled Tennyson, methinks
Forward, the Brexit Brigade!
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the brexiteer knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:
Into the valley of Brexit
Rode the sixty million
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/Matt homepage/Matt - May/0405-MATT-PORTAL-WEB-P1-large.png
They can avoid telling the likes of Poland* they'll be getting less money if they can get an enormous amount of exit money from the UK to see them through the next five years.
*I'm not picking on Poland unfairly. The Polish economy gets no favours from Shengen. The Polish economy loses a swathe of its young, ambitious, educated workforce through migration to the richer nations. This drives down the working class wages here and leaves a hole to be filled in the Polish economy through EU funding. Not an efficient long-term system in my view.
She is much further ahead than Farage and co ever achieved over here in a mainstream election and France is drifting to the extremes.
Macron polled just 24% - the second worst polling in a primary in over sixty years. He's the default, 'oh I suppose he'll have to do' candidate rather than someone possessing a compelling vision.
Approximately seven weeks ago, Rutte won the Dutch election - but his coalition was absolutely hammered, just like the two main French parties. Wilders, who lost, actually gained. The Dutch are, I believe, still without a coalition.
Europe is gradually coming apart with it's splintered electorates, with the inflexibility and inability to reform the EU being the key reason.
Macron seems to be a nothing candidate serving up vacuous Blairite tripe. That isn't advocating for Le Pen, it's recognising that they appear to have an appalling choice that will neither help France or Europe.
Firstly I cannot see how it can be argued that the unattributed comments were not designed to influence the British Election. TM is having the election to get a strong supporting mandate. The weaker her support the stronger the EU will be in the negotiations. Now common sense here would be that this is so obvious that it must have been meant for the German elections but I don't buy this binary view. You can try and influence two constituencies at once.
Secondly Juncker has never come across a problem that was not solved by more Europe, so are we surprised that he doesn't see eye to eye with our government. Some of the positions that have been coming from probably Juncker and his cabal rather than Barnier, are so pro European that it wouldn't wash with the electorate so no UK leader could back it.
Finally and a technicality but when Juncker's aide talks of how Brexit cannot be a success, I think leavers are mistranslating this (I did a German degree many years ago). It is not that Brexit will not be allowed to be a success, but rather that Brexit, as a loss of a country from the EU bloc will not be a success for Europe. That said there are certainly people on both sides who I think would want the negotiations to fail, I just don't think that this includes Key players such as May, or Barnier. May's actions yesterday can probably be attributed to a free
hit. (Call out Eurocrats like Juncker and stab him in the front rather than the back, motivate turnout among base for local elections which are much more bedrock support focused, use the politics free BBC local election day to avoid criticism from biggest EU advocate in the media, and lose criticism into Sunday at earliest due to local election results.)
Had loads of leaflets from the Lib Dems in recent weeks, way more than any other party. Think I had one Conservative and one Labour in 3 weeks.
03/05/2017, 15:49
Guest article: Garden Bridges that might have been (and could still be)
https://onlondon.co.uk/2017/05/03/guest-article-garden-bridges-that-might-have-been-and-could-still-be/
In fairness to Cameron, he knew how poorly someone like Junkcer would come across to the British public, and tried to stop his appointment.
I think the republicans will be the largest party - they were on course to win this election comfortably until Fillon's issues surfaced - I don't think that will tar the rest of the party in parliamentary elections.
The biggest surprise to me has been how unsuccessful the Lib Dems have been turning the 48% into support for them. However I think this could be down to a couple of things. Firstly whilst there are some very pro EU voices on here, and on social media, I am not sure how much of the electorate they actually represent, and probably even more relevant how apt the Lib Dems are to take advantage. I live in SW former Lib Dem constituency but have not met anyone who seems to want to change there voting intention. In my constituency there are more UKIP voters to squeeze than labour voters. Secondly it's down to democracy and fairness. I cannot be the only Lib Dem voter who voted remain, but would like the result of a strongly supported national referendum to be respected. It has certainly reduced my likelihood to vote in what should be a strong target.
Like many things, it started off as : "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if...", then progressed on to : "Let's do it!".
Unfortunately, without going through the "Should we do this?" and "Can we do this?" phases.
Those last two questions are the important ones, and the answer to both on this project was a resounding No.