When are they going to send Jezza out with a giant headstone, adorned with pledges like the ten commandments being handed down to Moses, to be plonked in the Downing St garden in the unlikely event that Jez wins?
The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.
It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
Well Sporting Index, Spreadex and Betfair all reckon they'll pick up 70 or 75!
Given how bad Ralling and Thrasher's predictions have been during the last two years, we should be getting ready for a Tory majority of 250 on June 8th
Trying to extrapolate general election results from the locals is a mug's game, was too many variables.
Unfortunately I never did get myself organised the other week to jump on the spreads, and think buying at 409 now has an awful lot of potential downside. 378 was a bargain though.
The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.
It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
Well Sporting Index, Spreadex and Betfair all reckon they'll pick up 70 or 75!
Given how bad Ralling and Thrasher's predictions have been during the last two years, we should be getting ready for a Tory majority of 250 on June 8th
Trying to extrapolate general election results from the locals is a mug's game, was too many variables.
Unfortunately I never did get myself organised the other week to jump on the spreads, and think buying at 409 now has an awful lot of potential downside. 378 was a bargain though.
It was, my buy at 378 looks good, only the CPS can derail it.
The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.
It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
You think they're still 'close' to joining though? Under Erdogan?
No, not at all. The problem was the Remain campaign talking as if Turkey were never going to join, when there was a meeting scheduled *for the following week* to progress Turkey's membership of the EU.
If we were registered for E.U ref then we should already be registered for 8th June right? Unless we moved or something. because I haven't recieved my polling card yet.
The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.
It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
You think they're still 'close' to joining though? Under Erdogan?
No, that misses the point entirely. The question is how things appeared in June 2016, without benefit of hindsight.
I remember it well - it didn't look close then either. I recall several leavers besides me criticising the spin put on it. Reasonable people will differ on that of course, but I do feel that one was played further than was fair by VoteLeave.
Well Sporting Index, Spreadex and Betfair all reckon they'll pick up 70 or 75!
Given how bad Ralling and Thrasher's predictions have been during the last two years, we should be getting ready for a Tory majority of 250 on June 8th
Trying to extrapolate general election results from the locals is a mug's game, was too many variables.
Unfortunately I never did get myself organised the other week to jump on the spreads, and think buying at 409 now has an awful lot of potential downside. 378 was a bargain though.
It was, my buy at 378 looks good, only the CPS can derail it.
Yeah, sadly I needed to get a two grand deposit (for £10 a seat) from a UK bank account along will all the usual KYC bollocks, as the price was creeping up. Hopefully it will come back down at some point in the next couple of weeks and I can take advantage
Well Sporting Index, Spreadex and Betfair all reckon they'll pick up 70 or 75!
Given how bad Ralling and Thrasher's predictions have been during the last two years, we should be getting ready for a Tory majority of 250 on June 8th
Trying to extrapolate general election results from the locals is a mug's game, was too many variables.
Unfortunately I never did get myself organised the other week to jump on the spreads, and think buying at 409 now has an awful lot of potential downside. 378 was a bargain though.
It was, my buy at 378 looks good, only the CPS can derail it.
Yeah, sadly I needed to get a two grand deposit (for £10 a seat) from a UK bank account along will all the usual KYC bollocks, as the price was creeping up. Hopefully it will come back down at some point in the next couple of weeks and I can take advantage
In that case, hope for a dozen CPS charges this week.
The price will crash, then return to equilibrium within a fortnight.
If we were registered for E.U ref then we should already be registered for 8th June right? Unless we moved or something. because I haven't recieved my polling card yet.
You can check if you're on the 'open' version of the register, and register again if you're not sure, on the gov website https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
I'm still stunned there are people, however much a minority, who really do seem to prioritise the demands of the membership over everything else, from people who may not even be members but just former supporters.
Well Sporting Index, Spreadex and Betfair all reckon they'll pick up 70 or 75!
Given how bad Ralling and Thrasher's predictions have been during the last two years, we should be getting ready for a Tory majority of 250 on June 8th
Trying to extrapolate general election results from the locals is a mug's game, was too many variables.
Unfortunately I never did get myself organised the other week to jump on the spreads, and think buying at 409 now has an awful lot of potential downside. 378 was a bargain though.
It was, my buy at 378 looks good, only the CPS can derail it.
Yeah, sadly I needed to get a two grand deposit (for £10 a seat) from a UK bank account along will all the usual KYC bollocks, as the price was creeping up. Hopefully it will come back down at some point in the next couple of weeks and I can take advantage
In that case, hope for a dozen CPS charges this week.
The price will crash, then return to equilibrium within a fortnight.
That was my line of thought too. Everyone will over-react for one day, then it's sub judice and will be chip wrapper the following morning.
'The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.'
The only way this will get resolved is to refer it to an arbitration court in a neutral country.
I just think that UKIP will field a much reduced slate of candidates, so their vote share will be down on national polling (even allowing for them standing in their better prospects).
That's an extremely good point. I keep forgetting that Ukip vote share isn't just down to how much they are squeezed, its also a matter of how many seats they abandon.
Now, the available polling evidence (as well as a common sense interpretation of what has happened in the local elections) suggests that the migration of voters from Ukip to Con is 4, 5, maybe more than 5 times greater than that from Ukip to Lab - so this could have big implications in nearly all of the Lab/Con marginals outside of London. If Ukip don't field candidates at all in any given seat, then will the fraction of their support that hasn't yet defected stay at home, or split in similar proportions to those who have already abandoned the party? Could possibly be enough to tip a couple of dozen more seats into the Tory column - as well as potentially raising the Con vote share further into the upper 40s.
So, LDs and Labour are both now committed to keeping the Triple Lock? Both are really trying to dig into the elderly vote, and presumably thinking the Tories will not commit to keeping it, which I hope is the case but seeing how TMay panicked over the budget I doubt will be the case.
Apparently the SSW Danish minority party is funded by the Danish government!
Think polls close 5pm UK time, so a curtain-raiser ahead of the French results.
Next Sun is the Nordrhein-Westfalen state election (Germany's biggest state) and definitely agree with Alastair Meeks that Merkel looks great value on Betfair at 1.67 for next Chancellor and think CDU/CSU pretty good for most seats at 1.46.
Next Tuesday is the South Korea presidential election, which will be a bit more important than usual:
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
I see that there is no longer a need for elections as we have the clear will of the Labour membership ...
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
Maybe he thought about every candidate in those 50 years and liked them all, we don't know.
So, LDs and Labour are both now committed to keeping the Triple Lock? Both are really trying to dig into the elderly vote, and presumably thinking the Tories will not commit to keeping it, which I hope is the case but seeing how TMay panicked over the budget I doubt will be the case.
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
'The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.'
The only way this will get resolved is to refer it to an arbitration court in a neutral country.
OK.
The EU claims we owe:
1. Spending that the UK has approved that it will no longer pay for. (As in, we signed off on a five year budget, and if we leave after year two, we approved spending commitments.)
2. A share of the EU's financial liabilities, i.e. the bloc's €80bn of gross debt.
3. A share of the EU's pension liabilities.
4. The cost of relocating EU bodies currently in the UK to the rest of the EU.
In a situation where we to leave the EU without a deal, they would almost certainly go to International Arbitration. It's also quite possible (likely) that the UK government would lose cases with respect to pensions under TUPE legislation in UK courts.
All told, were we to leave without a deal, we'd probably end up with a bill (on my wild estimate/guesses) in the €20-30bn range, once EU assets are taken into consideration.
But. The EU loses out at least as much as we do from no deal. The only outcome that makes any sense is that: (a) we take responsibility for UK MEPs and Eurocrats pensions, (b) the EU accepts that our share of EU assets is c. €20bn, (c) the EU offsets payments during the transition period (say three years x €8bn) as part of the payment. Together they come to (say) €70bn of notional value, and yet we we didn't write a cheque for a single euro-cent, penny or centime.
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
Maybe he thought about every candidate in those 50 years and liked them all, we don't know.
Tribal voting 101 - we always vote this way - why? because...
The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.
It is probably now sinking in with the Remoanariat that compared with these figures £350m a week looks like a sober, cautious, conservative, prudent and responsible estimate. Embarrassing for them, since the only "lie" they can now rely on is that Leave said that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU - a shocking travesty of the true situation, which is that negotiations were on foot for Turkey to join the EU.
The 'lie' was the impression given it was imminent, which it very much is not since they've been talking about it over 30 years and seem to be moving further away from joining, no matter any talk of fast tracking at times (seemingly as just nice talk, rather than any true indication the joining was moving significantly closer). As a leaver, I'll give the remoaners that one.
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
Maybe he thought about every candidate in those 50 years and liked them all, we don't know.
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
The Corbynite is obviously a cretin, but sorry, so is this woman's dad. There's nothing to be proud of in 50 years of voting for a dog turd as long as it's wearing a red rosette. Glad he's finally engaged some sort of thought process albeit late in life.
Maybe he thought about every candidate in those 50 years and liked them all, we don't know.
The only way this will get resolved is to refer it to an arbitration court in a neutral country.
OK.
The EU claims we owe:
1. Spending that the UK has approved that it will no longer pay for. (As in, we signed off on a five year budget, and if we leave after year two, we approved spending commitments.)
2. A share of the EU's financial liabilities, i.e. the bloc's €80bn of gross debt.
3. A share of the EU's pension liabilities.
4. The cost of relocating EU bodies currently in the UK to the rest of the EU.
In a situation where we to leave the EU without a deal, they would almost certainly go to International Arbitration. It's also quite possible (likely) that the UK government would lose cases with respect to pensions under TUPE legislation in UK courts.
All told, were we to leave without a deal, we'd probably end up with a bill (on my wild estimate/guesses) in the €20-30bn range, once EU assets are taken into consideration.
But. The EU loses out at least as much as we do from no deal. The only outcome that makes any sense is that: (a) we take responsibility for UK MEPs and Eurocrats pensions, (b) the EU accepts that our share of EU assets is c. €20bn, (c) the EU offsets payments during the transition period (say three years x €8bn) as part of the payment. Together they come to (say) €70bn of notional value, and yet we we didn't write a cheque for a single euro-cent, penny or centime.
1 The spending the budget was clearly on the basis that we were a member.
2 Ok with a ceiling fixed at €80bn (not open ended),presumably this is loans with nothing payable except in the case of a default. ?
3 UK MEP /Bureaucrats only.
4 No ,this is completely unreasonable there is nothing to stop them functioning in the UK. until the leases expire.
Agree most of it will be paid off via a transition agreement.
I just think that UKIP will field a much reduced slate of candidates, so their vote share will be down on national polling (even allowing for them standing in their better prospects).
That's an extremely good point. I keep forgetting that Ukip vote share isn't just down to how much they are squeezed, its also a matter of how many seats they abandon.
Now, the available polling evidence (as well as a common sense interpretation of what has happened in the local elections) suggests that the migration of voters from Ukip to Con is 4, 5, maybe more than 5 times greater than that from Ukip to Lab - so this could have big implications in nearly all of the Lab/Con marginals outside of London. If Ukip don't field candidates at all in any given seat, then will the fraction of their support that hasn't yet defected stay at home, or split in similar proportions to those who have already abandoned the party? Could possibly be enough to tip a couple of dozen more seats into the Tory column - as well as potentially raising the Con vote share further into the upper 40s.
I suppose it depends on how far the Tories wish to rely on the forces of Bigotry and Ignorance as represented by UKIP - and indeed the BNP - to propel them to a big majority.
Comments
She reminded me was a Corbynite.
She said I might has well have shown her a picture of me kicking a dog.
Unfortunately I never did get myself organised the other week to jump on the spreads, and think buying at 409 now has an awful lot of potential downside. 378 was a bargain though.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
https://twitter.com/eljmayes/status/860966239128223744
Based on this prediction (link) using the numbers in that post, and the average Scotland numbers from his Scotland page
The price will crash, then return to equilibrium within a fortnight.
https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/860975059086737408
https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/860951471222923266
It ties with what I think I noticed in a few Labour seats yesterday. Votes down 20% from 2013 simply due to people not voting..
https://www.gov.uk/register-to-vote
'The difference is because the €100bn is gross and €60bn net as I read. Some of the figue is liability for loans, to Ireland for example, that are going to be repaid, at which point we get our money back.
Not that it is politically possible to agree anything like that.'
The only way this will get resolved is to refer it to an arbitration court in a neutral country.
Lanark & Hamilton East, local election votes:
Lab 11,793 (32.1%)
SNP 11,462 (31.2%)
Con 10,297 (28.0%)
LD 1,138 (3.1%)
Ind 986 (2.7%)
Grn 872 (2.4%)
Sdt 90 (0.2%)
UKIP 80 (0.2%)
Con 16/1, Betfair Sportsbook.
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics
Now, the available polling evidence (as well as a common sense interpretation of what has happened in the local elections) suggests that the migration of voters from Ukip to Con is 4, 5, maybe more than 5 times greater than that from Ukip to Lab - so this could have big implications in nearly all of the Lab/Con marginals outside of London. If Ukip don't field candidates at all in any given seat, then will the fraction of their support that hasn't yet defected stay at home, or split in similar proportions to those who have already abandoned the party? Could possibly be enough to tip a couple of dozen more seats into the Tory column - as well as potentially raising the Con vote share further into the upper 40s.
Kill it. Kill it with fire.
http://www.dw.com/en/schleswig-holstein-casting-ballots-between-the-north-sea-and-the-baltic/a-38737260
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schleswig-Holstein_state_election,_2017
Apparently the SSW Danish minority party is funded by the Danish government!
Think polls close 5pm UK time, so a curtain-raiser ahead of the French results.
Next Sun is the Nordrhein-Westfalen state election (Germany's biggest state) and definitely agree with Alastair Meeks that Merkel looks great value on Betfair at 1.67 for next Chancellor and think CDU/CSU pretty good for most seats at 1.46.
Next Tuesday is the South Korea presidential election, which will be a bit more important than usual:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korean_presidential_election,_2017
That's amazing. One of my favourite twitter threads.
The EU claims we owe:
1. Spending that the UK has approved that it will no longer pay for. (As in, we signed off on a five year budget, and if we leave after year two, we approved spending commitments.)
2. A share of the EU's financial liabilities, i.e. the bloc's €80bn of gross debt.
3. A share of the EU's pension liabilities.
4. The cost of relocating EU bodies currently in the UK to the rest of the EU.
In a situation where we to leave the EU without a deal, they would almost certainly go to International Arbitration. It's also quite possible (likely) that the UK government would lose cases with respect to pensions under TUPE legislation in UK courts.
All told, were we to leave without a deal, we'd probably end up with a bill (on my wild estimate/guesses) in the €20-30bn range, once EU assets are taken into consideration.
But. The EU loses out at least as much as we do from no deal. The only outcome that makes any sense is that: (a) we take responsibility for UK MEPs and Eurocrats pensions, (b) the EU accepts that our share of EU assets is c. €20bn, (c) the EU offsets payments during the transition period (say three years x €8bn) as part of the payment. Together they come to (say) €70bn of notional value, and yet we we didn't write a cheque for a single euro-cent, penny or centime.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=dE0TWjn3yFQ
NEW THREAD
Not 14%
Just 14.
The only way this will get resolved is to refer it to an arbitration court in a neutral country.
OK.
The EU claims we owe:
1. Spending that the UK has approved that it will no longer pay for. (As in, we signed off on a five year budget, and if we leave after year two, we approved spending commitments.)
2. A share of the EU's financial liabilities, i.e. the bloc's €80bn of gross debt.
3. A share of the EU's pension liabilities.
4. The cost of relocating EU bodies currently in the UK to the rest of the EU.
In a situation where we to leave the EU without a deal, they would almost certainly go to International Arbitration. It's also quite possible (likely) that the UK government would lose cases with respect to pensions under TUPE legislation in UK courts.
All told, were we to leave without a deal, we'd probably end up with a bill (on my wild estimate/guesses) in the €20-30bn range, once EU assets are taken into consideration.
But. The EU loses out at least as much as we do from no deal. The only outcome that makes any sense is that: (a) we take responsibility for UK MEPs and Eurocrats pensions, (b) the EU accepts that our share of EU assets is c. €20bn, (c) the EU offsets payments during the transition period (say three years x €8bn) as part of the payment. Together they come to (say) €70bn of notional value, and yet we we didn't write a cheque for a single euro-cent, penny or centime.
1 The spending the budget was clearly on the basis that we were a member.
2 Ok with a ceiling fixed at €80bn (not open ended),presumably this is loans with nothing payable except in the case of a default. ?
3 UK MEP /Bureaucrats only.
4 No ,this is completely unreasonable there is nothing to stop them functioning in the UK. until the leases expire.
Agree most of it will be paid off via a transition agreement.