These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
The Le Pen result was especially embarrassing. Double the error of the next worst estimate.
I think that JJ has got a local by-election in his ward in the district council (as in general districts are not up for election). So that has been printed separately (in green) from the Cambridge wide elections to the County and C&P mayoralty (in standard white).
Buckingham Palace:
I thought that BP was due to be renovated. Perhaps the meeting is about that?
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
Agreed. Better off without that one I think. The French have (so far) completely and utterly embarrassed our polling industry.
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
The key thing in that is people don't know who they voted for last time. Psychologically we fill in a lot of gaps
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.
I agree May & Barnier want negotiations to succeed - and both want to see successful prosperous UK and EU down the road.
I don't think the same is necessarily true of arch-federalist Juncker or his henchman, who I suspect is eyeing a post-EU role in German politics and seeking to curry favour.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
Don't try to bring sense into this debate. (Though there are more contributors - or else Germany would be more annoyed at everyone else I think!) All rage, all the time is the way.
Yes, someone down thread mentioned there are 12 net contributors but Germany and the UK are the largest in money terms though Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands are larger per capita net contributors (which I don't find surprising).
There is a significant financial impact for the EU from our departure and that "impact" will need to be spread round the remaining 27.
I asked this yesterday and did not see an answer: what happens if the French president dies or is forced to stand down for some reason? Is there an election or a replacement?
If a president dies the President of the Senate (currently Gerard Larcher - Les Republicains) immediately becomes President. This is also the case if the constitutional Council decides that the president is perantly impeached.
In both cases, a new election has to take place between 20 and 35 days later.
As has happened twice in the history of the Fifth Republic, in 1969 and 1974.
The same guy was interim president twice: Alain Poher. He was first a minister in 1948 and only retired from the Senate presidency in 1992...
Yes, it's a good quiz question: who last served two non-consecutive tenures as head of state of France?
I can't say that polling was exactly brisk when I went to cast my vote this morning, but there were a few people turning up to vote. Mind you, this is true-Blue land, where people do their civic duty.
WM Mayor Watch: Having walked through Birmingham city centre at shortly after 9 am the only evidence of there being any elections at all was one slightly stressed looking woman in a blue 'Andy Street' tee-shirt hurrying somewhere.
I can't say that polling was exactly brisk when I went to cast my vote this morning, but there were a few people turning up to vote. Mind you, this is true-Blue land, where people do their civic duty.
I have just realised it's local election day - yet I have no polling card...
Don't try to bring sense into this debate. (Though there are more contributors - or else Germany would be more annoyed at everyone else I think!) All rage, all the time is the way.
Yes, someone down thread mentioned there are 12 net contributors but Germany and the UK are the largest in money terms though Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands are larger per capita net contributors (which I don't find surprising).
There is a significant financial impact for the EU from our departure and that "impact" will need to be spread round the remaining 27.
Or they spend less. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Eeeeeehhhh. Phew. That's better.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
That's just a pejorative way of saying that the problem is the unity of the EU27, and now that we've publicly declared our interest in dividing them, it makes it harder for us to achieve that objective.
My thoughts exactly, out last night, didn't see the debate so just had a brief look at the comments 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 believing that they appear to have an appalling choice that will neither help France or Europe.
It is a measure of where French politics is that the best-placed establishment candidate running as such polled single figures.
Macron, though actually establishment through-and-through, nonetheless chose to distance himself as far as possible from his former party and is running.
Le Pen is obviously as non-establishment as you get, outside the complete nutters.
Fillon, while a former PM, advocated reformist policies far in excess of what France has previously accepted.
And Melenchon comes from a radical left position which again presents a genuine challenge to the status quo.
You have to drop to the hapless Hamon in fifth before you reach a party and policies from France's consensus.
Hamon was very very from consensual... He spent the last five years criticizing the socialist government from within and then as an MP after being kicked out. His economic policies were made fun of by most of the press. He played the role of th naive and inexperienced idealist.
So there was not a single candidate actually defending what happened during the last few years. The paradox is that it was a big loss for the right: as everybody agreed that Hollande was beyond hapless, even Macron could appear as a change of government.
Macron actually managed the same thing Sarkozy did in 2007: coming from the government in place but positioning himself as such an outsider that everybody forgot the elements of continuity.
Thanks for that, and fair enough: I must admit, I didn't pay that much attention to Hamon's campaign.
Apropos of nothing today will be the first time in 27 years of voting that I have cast my ballot after 9am. I have always tried to be first in the queue. Not so this time, my partner wants to come with me after work.
I can't say that polling was exactly brisk when I went to cast my vote this morning, but there were a few people turning up to vote. Mind you, this is true-Blue land, where people do their civic duty.
I have just realised it's local election day - yet I have no polling card...
I can't say that polling was exactly brisk when I went to cast my vote this morning, but there were a few people turning up to vote. Mind you, this is true-Blue land, where people do their civic duty.
Mine was utterly dead. Psephologically my ward is interesting this time round. It is ultra-safe Labour, very wwc, very brexity. There is a full slate (Minus the greens) of candidates with no indpendents to scruff up the %s. The polling station was dead.
Don't try to bring sense into this debate. (Though there are more contributors - or else Germany would be more annoyed at everyone else I think!) All rage, all the time is the way.
Yes, someone down thread mentioned there are 12 net contributors but Germany and the UK are the largest in money terms though Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands are larger per capita net contributors (which I don't find surprising).
There is a significant financial impact for the EU from our departure and that "impact" will need to be spread round the remaining 27.
Yes it will. We may not have the stronger hand, we may be more seriously impacted, but the 'the glorious EU will not care either way' crowd are ignoring there is an impact for them of things don't go well, even if they will manage better than us they'd surely like to avoid having the worst case scenario. You'd think.
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.
I agree May & Barnier want negotiations to succeed - and both want to see successful prosperous UK and EU down the road.
I don't think the same is necessarily true of arch-federalist Juncker or his henchman, who I suspect is eyeing a post-EU role in German politics and seeking to curry favour.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
I think the problem for us is that whilst TM can control who is included in the negotiation from a unit of 1, but as the EU represents 27 there are naturally people who want to get involved and shape the settlement. Dogmatic federalists being sidelined would be good for both sides. Hopefully Barnier understands this.
I can't say that polling was exactly brisk when I went to cast my vote this morning, but there were a few people turning up to vote. Mind you, this is true-Blue land, where people do their civic duty.
I have just realised it's local election day - yet I have no polling card...
Aren't you in London? No elections there.
Thanks - that is a relief. I always like to vote, although on June 8 I may do so by spoiling my ballot.
On fascism generally, the way it could rise properly in Europe is thus: 1) mass migration continues 2) enclaves grow larger 3) native populations integrate with migrants rather than vice versa 4) terror attacks and some backwards views of women lead to rising sex crimes 5) mainstream politicians struggle to cope 6) the far right promises what might be called strong medicine. It is not popular, but 7) when measures are necessary and the mainstream has failed, people may be willing to vote for someone who goes too far, because they fear that is better than doing nothing
Integration, enforcing the rule of law (FGM prosecutions, for example...), and a staunch defence of Western values like free speech stave off any potential far right threat.
The disintegration of the EU is a separate matter (I suspect it won't happen for decades) that could see a stark rise in nationalism.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
That's just a pejorative way of saying that the problem is the unity of the EU27, and now that we've publicly declared our interest in dividing them, it makes it harder for us to achieve.
No. Some in the EU believe that for the EU to prosper the UK must suffer.
I doubt that's a view shared by all 27 EU governments who have electorates to face.
So, what do we think the Royal announcement is going to be? Meeting at 10am followed by public statement.
We know it isn't a Royal death or abdication, so:
Resignation or retirement of very senior aide Major public event announcement Harry's engagement to a divorcee Divorce of Charles or William Some boring internal reshuffle Selloff of part of the Estate
Any other possibles?
Phillip to retire?
Congratulations.
Does raise the question of whether he's setting a precedent for his wife. Yes, that'd be much more legally complicated but that'd be one reason why testing the water in this way might be a good idea.
My thoughts exactly. He's an outrider for her in due course I reckon. Charles will fill in the gap he leaves in the meantime
And who can blame them? With William happily married with an heir and a spare, the succession is secure for three generations. I think most of the country would understand both of them stepping back.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
That's just a pejorative way of saying that the problem is the unity of the EU27, and now that we've publicly declared our interest in dividing them, it makes it harder for us to achieve.
No. Some in the EU believe that for the EU to prosper the UK must suffer.
I doubt that's a view shared by all 27 EU governments who have electorates to face.
Where do you think the difference is between Juncker/Selmayr's position and Merkel's or Macron's?
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.
If their income reduces they could spend less.
Or those who are so in favour of "Europe" could put their money where their mouths are.
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
Agreed. Better off without that one I think. The French have (so far) completely and utterly embarrassed our polling industry.
Isn't it easier to call a result within 3% when all the candidates are so unpopular? (<25% of the vote)
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
Ridiculous. She is 91. She should afford herself a bloody rest for crying out loud.
Don't try to bring sense into this debate. (Though there are more contributors - or else Germany would be more annoyed at everyone else I think!) All rage, all the time is the way.
Yes, someone down thread mentioned there are 12 net contributors but Germany and the UK are the largest in money terms though Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands are larger per capita net contributors (which I don't find surprising).
There is a significant financial impact for the EU from our departure and that "impact" will need to be spread round the remaining 27.
Which is why they are desperate to get a massive cheque from the UK as she leaves. They don't want to ask the other members for more money, and spending less simply isn't something they understand.
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
Agreed. Better off without that one I think. The French have (so far) completely and utterly embarrassed our polling industry.
Isn't it easier to call a result within 3% when all the candidates are so unpopular? (<25% of the vote)</p>
Last night was hilarious. The poster named after a footballer known for his fascist tendencies assured us the debate was a home run for Le Pen. S/he wasn't the only one. S/he ran away when asked to forecast the result of the election on Sunday.
Polling vs PB Leaver-Fascist anecdote.
Does the polling really show anything though. Even the Beeb said that MLP had done well. The polling seemed to show that Macron supporters thought he did well, and like Le Oen supporters. Is that a surprise? or real victory for Macron. I suppose he didn't do anything to alienate his support, but he seems to me to be the vanilla, least offensive all around candidate in the first place.
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Seriously, what's the point of a statement like that? I presume he's a firm republican and he shouldn't need to pretend otherwise even at such a time, but where'd the harm be waiting a bit before getting like htat?
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
That's just a pejorative way of saying that the problem is the unity of the EU27, and now that we've publicly declared our interest in dividing them, it makes it harder for us to achieve.
No. Some in the EU believe that for the EU to prosper the UK must suffer.
I doubt that's a view shared by all 27 EU governments who have electorates to face.
Where do you think the difference is between Juncker/Selmayr's position and Merkel's or Macron's?
Both Merkel & Macron have electorates to face - Macron has commented on the impact of Brexit on fisheries - which could be a disaster for French fishermen - he has no interest in a 'hard Brexit' pour encourager les autres....
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
Agreed. Better off without that one I think. The French have (so far) completely and utterly embarrassed our polling industry.
Isn't it easier to call a result within 3% when all the candidates are so unpopular? (<25% of the vote)</p>
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Seriously, what's the point of a statement like that? I presume he's a firm republican and he shouldn't need to pretend otherwise even at such a time, but where'd the harm be waiting a bit before getting like htat?
He is a she, but yep, sour doesn't even begin to cover it.
In response to @Stodge below - "the corollary is that process has to be made so unappetising as to be a deterrent for any and all future potential leavers. "
Why? Surely the advantages of the EU should be enough to keep other states within the EU without all this deterrence nonsense? Surely they like FoM and political integration?
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Seriously, what's the point of a statement like that? I presume he's a firm republican and he shouldn't need to pretend otherwise even at such a time, but where'd the harm be waiting a bit before getting like htat?
Ridiculous tweeting. I'm a republican but I dont harbour any ill will towards the royal family, I just want them replaced and sent on their way with our thanks for services rendered. There is no need for bitterness. We are where we are and will be where democracy takes us. I reserve my opprobrium for those that make the decisions.
Institute Jaques Delors on a post-Brexit EU budget:
Although much is still uncertain, it is clear that Brexit will deal a shock to the EU budget. There is no easy way to fill the “Brexit gap” of around €10 billion per year, especially because a unanimous decision is required to do so and neither contribution increases or budget cuts will be palatable to all Member States.
This spells trouble for the negotiations concerning the next MFF. They are likely to be even tenser than usual because Brexit entrenches the existing differences between net contributors and net recipients.
Today’s largest net contributors would be hit hardest by an increase in contributions, while today’s net recipients would be relatively unaffected. Budget cuts, on the other hand, would likely hurt net recipients by reducing spending on the two largest budget titles, namely the CAP and cohesion policy.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
That's not how it works, Christ didn't come down from the cross. They view it in those terms, the position is semi religious in its nature
How it works is surprisingly flexible for an institution based on history and precedent. Indeed, the advantage of there being such a long history is that there's nearly always a precedent for any course of action. Such as a regency.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
Ridiculous. She is 91. She should afford herself a bloody rest for crying out loud.
You seem to have misinterpreted what I said. Of course she can have a rest, the question is does she need to 'retire' to do it. Charles and the others could in effect do most or even allthings without an official 'retirement' announcement or even abdication.
These gloating " counting one's chickens " threads have become a PB ritual on the eve of the recurrent polling disasters of recent vintage.
You mean polling disasters like the 1st round of the French election ? like Elabe who predicted Macron 24 Le Pen 21.5 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.5 when the result was Macron 24 Le Pen 21.3 Fillon 20 and Mélenchon 19.6 ?
That was a disaster of epic proportions
It won't be weighted by "Who did you vote for last time". Of all the UK GE poll weightings, that one must be the absolute worst.
Agreed. Better off without that one I think. The French have (so far) completely and utterly embarrassed our polling industry.
Isn't it easier to call a result within 3% when all the candidates are so unpopular? (<25% of the vote)</p>
No, it is not easy at all.
Easier rather than easy.
Our pollsters were all there or thereabouts with the minor parties. The big gaps were up the top with the two parties accumulating c70%.
If our EU friends are worried about the impact of Brexit on their budget, they have a simple way of mitigating the damage: offer us a trade deal which is sufficiently attractive for us to continue to pay something for a transitional period, and also try to get us to sign back into as many EU programmes as possible. They can also save themselves some unnecessary costs by leaving the European Banking Authority and European Medicines Agency in London.
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.
I agree May & Barnier want negotiations to succeed - and both want to see successful prosperous UK and EU down the road.
I don't think the same is necessarily true of arch-federalist Juncker or his henchman, who I suspect is eyeing a post-EU role in German politics and seeking to curry favour.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
You are making a false distinction IMO between the EU27 governments and "arch federalists" such as Juncker. These federalists represent the consensus of the EU27 governments that are notoriously unherdable but seem to have an unusual degree of unity on this. I don't think it is helpful to talk about problem parties. There will be a deal if both parties want one. The EU knows pretty much what it wants; I'm not sure we do.
What we haven't faced up to is that Brexit comes with some very heavy compromises. Sooner or later we will have to face up to those compromises, because the EU is not going away and we need to deal with it to have a meaningful relationship with our neighbouring countries.
I expect a deal, mostly on the EU's terms. We can still influence that deal, although Mrs May has wasted a lot of negotiating capital already.
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Seriously, what's the point of a statement like that? I presume he's a firm republican and he shouldn't need to pretend otherwise even at such a time, but where'd the harm be waiting a bit before getting like htat?
Chi is a she.
And it's a joke. Not a classic joke, but a joke nevertheless. I'm afraid it's not only the Left who are too quick to take offence in this country.
Should have one mayor for Yorkshire, one mayor for the Ridings, one mayor to rule them all, and give Lancashire hidings.
I could have voted in The Manchester Mayoral instead today but chose not to register as I would have been in a very awkward position in not voting for a friend.
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Is any of it not true?</blockquote
Regardless of your opinion of the royals it takes a special kind of person to call out a 95 year old man on the announcement of his retirement. Hats off and take a bow.....twat
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
That's just a pejorative way of saying that the problem is the unity of the EU27, and now that we've publicly declared our interest in dividing them, it makes it harder for us to achieve.
No. Some in the EU believe that for the EU to prosper the UK must suffer.
I doubt that's a view shared by all 27 EU governments who have electorates to face.
I think it's mainly the EU nomenklatura that takes that line. That is why May was really addressing their nominal masters in the capitals of Europe. A successful Brexit is probably bad for their project, even though it can be good for the 27 members
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Is any of it not true?
That's hardly the point. MPs in safe seats generally get to "retire in financial security at time of their choosing from a job they enjoy". It's the snideness of the comment - the 'congratulations' - that grates.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
Ridiculous. She is 91. She should afford herself a bloody rest for crying out loud.
I must admit that as a strong constitutional Royalist but without any particular affinity for the individual members, I think it is probably bad all round for her to carry on for so long. It puts her successor in a difficult position and I think causes unnecessary uncertainty and instability in the longer term. It is also clearly not in the interests of the Queen as an individual to be undertaking a fairly strenuous set of duties at her age.
Pope Benedict showed the way when he retired and I think it would be best all round if the Queen did similar.
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
Is any of it not true?
That's hardly the point. MPs in safe seats generally get to "retire in financial security at time of their choosing from a job they enjoy". It's the snideness of the comment - the 'congratulations' - that grates.
When we have a King in this country, their wives automatically become Queens.
So why didn't Prince Philip become King when his wife became Queen?
Is this everyday sexism in action?
Yes. Same as why the far more able Queen in chess is not allowed to be the most important, and has to spend all their time protecting the weak and ineffectual king.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
Ridiculous. She is 91. She should afford herself a bloody rest for crying out loud.
I must admit that as a strong constitutional Royalist but without any particular affinity for the individual members, I think it is probably bad all round for her to carry on for so long. It puts her successor in a difficult position and I think causes unnecessary uncertainty and instability in the longer term. It is also clearly not in the interests of the Queen as an individual to be undertaking a fairly strenuous set of duties at her age.
Pope Benedict showed the way when he retired and I think it would be best all round if the Queen did similar.
I think what is the back of her mind is a retirement of a monarch contributed to the early death of her father.
Update on my Betfair complaint: BF say they have now decided NOT to settle any of the "date of next GE" bets until the election has actually taken place on June 8th.
That is outrageous. It's also highly shortsighted as I imagine I'm not alone in intending to recycle the money straight back into other markets on BF.
To make your representations it just takes an email to:
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
What an utterly snide and unpleasant comment. Scumbag.
There are times when it's best to put opinions to one side and either say something nice or nothing at all.
It's good to identify those who don't understand that, like Ms Onwurah. Those who 'celebrated' Margaret Thatcher's death are others.
Who gets to judge when these "times" are?
I don't think the fact that PtG has suckled at the chafed nipple of the British tax payer for eight decades and is worth maintaining a solemn and respectful purdah.
When we have a King in this country, their wives automatically become Queens.
So why didn't Prince Philip become King when his wife became Queen?
Is this everyday sexism in action?
Yes. Same as why the far more able Queen in chess is not allowed to be the most important, and has to spend all their time protecting the weak and ineffectual king.
Interestingly the Queen piece used to have the same movement restrictions as the king.
I voted in the Council Elections. Scotland so single transferable vote system. At least I know who the Conservative candidate is, who seems a well-meaning guy even if he has strange views on climate change, which are probably harmless in a local government context. So he got my No. 1 vote. Further numbers randomly applied to other parties.
When we have a King in this country, their wives automatically become Queens.
So why didn't Prince Philip become King when his wife became Queen?
Is this everyday sexism in action?
Yes. Same as why the far more able Queen in chess is not allowed to be the most important, and has to spend all their time protecting the weak and ineffectual king.
Interestingly the Queen piece used to have the same movement restrictions as the king.
In the medieval game (inherited from the Arabs) there were two queens and they were restricted to moving two squares diagonally.
One of the queens was taken away because it was unacceptable for the King to be a bigamist!
But to make up for that she was made extra powerful.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
Ridiculous. She is 91. She should afford herself a bloody rest for crying out loud.
I must admit that as a strong constitutional Royalist but without any particular affinity for the individual members, I think it is probably bad all round for her to carry on for so long. It puts her successor in a difficult position and I think causes unnecessary uncertainty and instability in the longer term. It is also clearly not in the interests of the Queen as an individual to be undertaking a fairly strenuous set of duties at her age.
Pope Benedict showed the way when he retired and I think it would be best all round if the Queen did similar.
I think what is the back of her mind is a retirement of a monarch contributed to the early death of her father.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
Her workload can and has been reduced, as is only right and proper, but she is and would still be the monarch - most indications are she swore an oath and intends to keep it, she feels that very strongly apparently, and it is not an issue of forcing her to keep going. Charles and the others are there to fulfill any obligations should she be unable.
Ridiculous. She is 91. She should afford herself a bloody rest for crying out loud.
I must admit that as a strong constitutional Royalist but without any particular affinity for the individual members, I think it is probably bad all round for her to carry on for so long. It puts her successor in a difficult position and I think causes unnecessary uncertainty and instability in the longer term. It is also clearly not in the interests of the Queen as an individual to be undertaking a fairly strenuous set of duties at her age.
Pope Benedict showed the way when he retired and I think it would be best all round if the Queen did similar.
No need for formal retirement. Just have her open Parliament. She could fulfil the duties she wants to do, Ascot, etc, or are essential, meeting PM, etc. Factory tours and overseas trips can be done by Charles, et al.
When we have a King in this country, their wives automatically become Queens.
So why didn't Prince Philip become King when his wife became Queen?
Is this everyday sexism in action?
Isn't it simply because, given inheritance down the male line until changed recently (#blamenickclegg), it was so uncommon for the monarch to be the Queen, that you could safely assume a reference to a Queen was to Queen Consort. Since a King Consort is unusual (although I believe the title has been conferred now and then), Prince Consort is more usual to avoid confusion. With the change in rules making a king or queen equally likely, check back in 200 years and it may well change. Indeed, there has been some talk of it changing for Kate in due course (and indeed Camilla may well not take the title for different reasons).
Comments
I think that JJ has got a local by-election in his ward in the district council (as in general districts are not up for election). So that has been printed separately (in green) from the Cambridge wide elections to the County and C&P mayoralty (in standard white).
Buckingham Palace:
I thought that BP was due to be renovated. Perhaps the meeting is about that?
Good luck, Mr. Pulpstar.
I see that the bit of France that borders Italy is most pro-Le Pen. Personally, I think it's wrong to blame the Italians for this.
I don't think the same is necessarily true of arch-federalist Juncker or his henchman, who I suspect is eyeing a post-EU role in German politics and seeking to curry favour.
I think May's comment was directed at the governments of the EU27 - the UK is not the problem in negotiations - its the arch-federalists of the EU.
There is a significant financial impact for the EU from our departure and that "impact" will need to be spread round the remaining 27.
I am no royalist but asking the monarch to carry on into her nineties is absurd. She should retire, as should he.
The polling station was dead.
Ha! Indeed I should imagine many heads will be rolling for that mathematical outrage.
They may view it like that, but they are wrong to do so. It's barmy thinking.
1) mass migration continues
2) enclaves grow larger
3) native populations integrate with migrants rather than vice versa
4) terror attacks and some backwards views of women lead to rising sex crimes
5) mainstream politicians struggle to cope
6) the far right promises what might be called strong medicine. It is not popular, but
7) when measures are necessary and the mainstream has failed, people may be willing to vote for someone who goes too far, because they fear that is better than doing nothing
Integration, enforcing the rule of law (FGM prosecutions, for example...), and a staunch defence of Western values like free speech stave off any potential far right threat.
The disintegration of the EU is a separate matter (I suspect it won't happen for decades) that could see a stark rise in nationalism.
Boo!
I doubt that's a view shared by all 27 EU governments who have electorates to face.
Congratulations to Prince Philip on retiring in financial security at time of his choosing from a job he enjoys #forthemanynotthefew #waspi
From a Labour MP...
And who can blame them? With William happily married with an heir and a spare, the succession is secure for three generations. I think most of the country would understand both of them stepping back.
Or those who are so in favour of "Europe" could put their money where their mouths are.
Just a thought
It explains everything. The garish fashion choices, the constant innuendo, the inability to understand military history.
I look forward to HUYFD's thesis on how Le Pen leading in only one French region represents LA VICTOIRE!
He's in his mid-90s and has served this country for longer than most people have been alive. Having a go at the Duke of Edinburgh won't work out well.
It's an electoral college where Provence scores 100pts and every other region one point apiece
IF TRUE
(sorry)Why? Surely the advantages of the EU should be enough to keep other states within the EU without all this deterrence nonsense? Surely they like FoM and political integration?
Although much is still uncertain, it is clear that Brexit will deal a shock to the EU budget. There is no easy way to fill the “Brexit gap” of around €10 billion per year, especially because a unanimous decision is required to do so and neither contribution increases or budget cuts will be palatable to all Member States.
This spells trouble for the negotiations concerning the next MFF. They are likely to be even tenser than usual because Brexit entrenches the existing differences between net contributors and net recipients.
Today’s largest net contributors would be hit hardest by an increase in contributions, while today’s net recipients would be relatively unaffected. Budget cuts, on the other hand, would likely hurt net recipients by reducing spending on the two largest budget titles, namely the CAP and cohesion policy.
http://www.institutdelors.eu/media/brexiteubudget-haasrubio-jdi-jan17.pdf?pdf=ok
Should have one mayor for Yorkshire, one mayor for the Ridings, one mayor to rule them all, and give Lancashire hidings.
Our pollsters were all there or thereabouts with the minor parties. The big gaps were up the top with the two parties accumulating c70%.
A question that's always bugged me for years
When we have a King in this country, their wives automatically become Queens.
So why didn't Prince Philip become King when his wife became Queen?
Is this everyday sexism in action?
SNP 40 Con 37
What we haven't faced up to is that Brexit comes with some very heavy compromises. Sooner or later we will have to face up to those compromises, because the EU is not going away and we need to deal with it to have a meaningful relationship with our neighbouring countries.
I expect a deal, mostly on the EU's terms. We can still influence that deal, although Mrs May has wasted a lot of negotiating capital already.
And it's a joke. Not a classic joke, but a joke nevertheless. I'm afraid it's not only the Left who are too quick to take offence in this country.
Oops!
http://bit.ly/2p0mPZW
It's good to identify those who don't understand that, like Ms Onwurah. Those who 'celebrated' Margaret Thatcher's death are others.
The word King has an implied seniority. That's due to history, or rather the patriarchy.
Wrong to Leave 43
Pope Benedict showed the way when he retired and I think it would be best all round if the Queen did similar.
She'll take it down but its too late.
Support.en@betfair.com
I don't think the fact that PtG has suckled at the chafed nipple of the British tax payer for eight decades and is worth maintaining a solemn and respectful purdah.
One of the queens was taken away because it was unacceptable for the King to be a bigamist!
But to make up for that she was made extra powerful.
In hindsight, do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union?
RIGHT: 46 (+3)
WRONG: 43 (-2)
https://twitter.com/malmstromeu/status/859758922588196864
What's your prediction for the 1st preference split?