Presumably May will largely leave ministers in place given most have barely had time to fully settle in yet. You read the odd piece e.g the ineptness of Andrea Leadsom at the dispatch box in the Guardian but the question always is whether this is a leftie journo playing revenge politics with a despised brexiteer or whether they're on to anything . Hunt maybe is perhaps someone who perhaps wouldn't mind being moved given the continued visceral hostility to him by some in the medical profession (as seen in recent days). A promotion to CoE might be pushing it a bit
On the whole I agree and some on here, as usual, are blowing up next to nothing to be a big story. However, one cabinet post that I do think needs to change is DEFRA. The exit from the EU means that a completely new settlement for farming in the UK must be found. To do it right will need someone with imagination, energy and drive.
DEFRA has for many years been a backwater in which second rate ministers on the downward slide can be dumped as a sort of consolation prize. That is not going to be good enough in the next parliament. TM should find someone good to put in there.
Boris Johnson was reportedly confronted by a Sikh woman after he discussed alcohol during a visit to a Gurdwara.
The Foreign Secretary was visiting a Sikh temple in St George’s, Bristol where he made remarks about ending tariffs on whisky between the UK and India.
But a Sikh voter who was there berated him for his remarks, asking: “How dare you talk about alcohol in a Sikh temple?” The Sikh religion forbids drinking alcohol.
Mr Johnson is said to have apologised repeatedly after she told him about alcoholism in her family.
I cannot see any Next Chancellor markets and the Next Lib Dem market has largely been withdrawn with only 1 book who offer Vince Cable at 16-1-there was some 50s available a few days ago.This market merits attention as the 1st and 3rd favourites are more likely than not to be non-runners.The favourites have flip-flopped in the North Norfolk market,the Tories in from 7-4 to 4-5 and Carshalton has hardened to 4-7 for the Tories so Lamb and Brake could both be kebabbed.
Have any of our East Mids correspondents got a view on Gedling constituency ? Seems an easy Tory gain on nat trends but then Coaker held on last time whereas neighbouring Broxtowe and similar suburban seats fell (sorry Nick) I can't decide whether 1/3 for the Cons is value, or whether he has some personal appeal there and might keep it close. There's barely any UKIP there - straight up Lab Con race
I grew up in that seat.
He does have some personal appeal, but the Corbyn factor will mean it votes Tory for first time since 1992 IMO.
Plus there was nearly 15% UKIP last time, if I'm not mistaken - easily enough to put the Tories over the top?
Thanks Peter - yes you are right there was more UKIP than I thought 14% last time.
Presumably May will largely leave ministers in place given most have barely had time to fully settle in yet. You read the odd piece e.g the ineptness of Andrea Leadsom at the dispatch box in the Guardian but the question always is whether this is a leftie journo playing revenge politics with a despised brexiteer or whether they're on to anything . Hunt maybe is perhaps someone who perhaps wouldn't mind being moved given the continued visceral hostility to him by some in the medical profession (as seen in recent days). A promotion to CoE might be pushing it a bit
On the whole I agree and some on here, as usual, are blowing up next to nothing to be a big story. However, one cabinet post that I do think needs to change is DEFRA. The exit from the EU means that a completely new settlement for farming in the UK must be found. To do it right will need someone with imagination, energy and drive.
DEFRA has for many years been a backwater in which second rate ministers on the downward slide can be dumped as a sort of consolation prize. That is not going to be good enough in the next parliament. TM should find someone good to put in there.
That is a very good point. They should get back Nick Herbert. A remainer, but a lot of prior in the sector and thought to have been scheduled to be SoS had the Cons won an overall majority in 2010.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU.
I can't see that moving the 52% but with enough of an airing it might pull a few per cent out of the Corbyn column.
No wonder some of his opponents have been dredging up all the old abortion/gay sex type stories to discredit him.
But people know it is never going to happen. The LibDems are W-A-Y more unlikely to have any influence on the next Government than is Jeremy Corbyn, and that is vanishingly small. As one of my Grandpa's inexhaustible supply of colourful expressions would have it, they might as well wish in one hand and shit in the other.....
If you wanted to do something about stopping Brexit, the time to put in the effort was May/June 2016, not May/June 2017.
From July 2016 onwards there should have been a realigning of all those opposed to Brexit with the soft brexiteer/Dan Hannan leaver types. In those early days there was scope to present a sort of majority coalition - if 90% of remainers would prefer a soft brexit, and say 30% of leavers, it would have been a legitimate option. Trying to overturn the result of the referendum was a non starter. It left May with more to worry about from the press and her right than on the remain flank, hence why she decided to abandon single market plans.
I think the Lib Dems could have made more progress against tory remainers by going for that approach, and it is primarily tory voters that the Lib Dems should be trying to win over.
I agree. Farron got too caught up in, in his view, speaking for the 48%.
There's nothing wrong with doing that per se. Contrary to what some Brexiteers claim, winning gets you the right to try to implement your plan, not to silence all opposition or to scream hysterically at people who think your vision is nonsense to shut up or worse.
But the better strategy should've been to speak for moderate Remainers AND moderate Leavers in favour of a soft version of Brexit. As it is, Farron's strategy is throwing people like his leadership rival, Norman Lamb, and SW England candidates under a bus to please hardline Remain new members.
Have any of our East Mids correspondents got a view on Gedling constituency ? Seems an easy Tory gain on nat trends but then Coaker held on last time whereas neighbouring Broxtowe and similar suburban seats fell (sorry Nick) I can't decide whether 1/3 for the Cons is value, or whether he has some personal appeal there and might keep it close. There's barely any UKIP there - straight up Lab Con race
I grew up in that seat.
He does have some personal appeal, but the Corbyn factor will mean it votes Tory for first time since 1992 IMO.
Plus there was nearly 15% UKIP last time, if I'm not mistaken - easily enough to put the Tories over the top?
Labour's making a serious effort there, and in general the Labour ground game is superior in the Nottingham area. As Peter observes, UKIP got 15% (though the Greens got 3%). Vernon has a substantial personal vote and is running a personalised campaign (non-standard posters for a start) and I've heard a senior Conservative say that demographics there have been moving to Labour (and the reverse in Broxtowe). On current polls the Tories must be hopeful but it's not a walkover.
On Boris's latest exploit, I'm a bit puzzled. I know Sikhs who are quite religious but also quite keen on a drink or two - the Standard is mistaken on that. I think it varies with the particular brand, like Christianity. Perhaps this particular temple is strict on the issue?
If you are a baptised Sikh, then no booze or meat. If you aren't, then these rules don't apply.
He could use adictionary: Incitement:the action of provoking unlawful behaviour or urging someone to behave unlawfully. Sleepy eyes hasn't done anything of the sort in that tweet.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39942573
If they only get a handful of MPs on June 8th, will they finally shut the fuck up about a second referendum and accept the result?
No,Mr Mark. We will fight the Conservative-UKIP Dictatorship every step of the way.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU.
I can't see that moving the 52% but with enough of an airing it might pull a few per cent out of the Corbyn column.
No wonder some of his opponents have been dredging up all the old abortion/gay sex type stories to discredit him.
But people know it is never going to happen. The LibDems are W-A-Y more unlikely to have any influence on the next Government than is Jeremy Corbyn, and that is vanishingly small. As one of my Grandpa's inexhaustible supply of colourful expressions would have it, they might as well wish in one hand and shit in the other.....
If you wanted to do something about stopping Brexit, the time to put in the effort was May/June 2016, not May/June 2017.
From July 2016 onwards there should have been a realigning of all those opposed to Brexit with the soft brexiteer/Dan Hannan leaver types. In those early days there was scope to present a sort of majority coalition - if 90% of remainers would prefer a soft brexit, and say 30% of leavers, it would have been a legitimate option. Trying to overturn the result of the referendum was a non starter. It left May with more to worry about from the press and her right than on the remain flank, hence why she decided to abandon single market plans.
I think the Lib Dems could have made more progress against tory remainers by going for that approach, and it is primarily tory voters that the Lib Dems should be trying to win over.
I agree. Farron got too caught up in, in his view, speaking for the 48%.
There's nothing wrong with doing that per se. Contrary to what some Brexiteers claim, winning gets you the right to try to implement your plan, not to silence all opposition or to scream hysterically at people who think your vision is nonsense to shut up or worse.
But the better strategy should've been to speak for moderate Remainers AND moderate Leavers in favour of a soft version of Brexit. As it is, Farron's strategy is throwing people like his leadership rival, Norman Lamb, and SW England candidates under a bus to please hardline Remain new members.
It needs to be said that Farron is a seriously crap leader. Content to be the sneering leftie outsider while his colleagues were doing the hard yards in coalition the transition to the top has found him out.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39942573
If they only get a handful of MPs on June 8th, will they finally shut the fuck up about a second referendum and accept the result?
No,Mr Mark. We will fight the Conservative-UKIP Dictatorship every step of the way.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU.
I can't see that moving the 52% but with enough of an airing it might pull a few per cent out of the Corbyn column.
No wonder some of his opponents have been dredging up all the old abortion/gay sex type stories to discredit him.
But people know it is never going to happen. The LibDems are W-A-Y more unlikely to have any influence on the next Government than is Jeremy Corbyn, and that is vanishingly small. As one of my Grandpa's inexhaustible supply of colourful expressions would have it, they might as well wish in one hand and shit in the other.....
If you wanted to do something about stopping Brexit, the time to put in the effort was May/June 2016, not May/June 2017.
From July 2016 onwards there should have been a realigning of all those opposed to Brexit with the soft brexiteer/Dan Hannan leaver types. In those early days there was scope to present a sort of majority coalition - if 90% of remainers would prefer a soft brexit, and say 30% of leavers, it would have been a legitimate option. Trying to overturn the result of the referendum was a non starter. It left May with more to worry about from the press and her right than on the remain flank, hence why she decided to abandon single market plans.
I think the Lib Dems could have made more progress against tory remainers by going for that approach, and it is primarily tory voters that the Lib Dems should be trying to win over.
I agree. Farron got too caught up in, in his view, speaking for the 48%.
There's nothing wrong with doing that per se. Contrary to what some Brexiteers claim, winning gets you the right to try to implement your plan, not to silence all opposition or to scream hysterically at people who think your vision is nonsense to shut up or worse.
But the better strategy should've been to speak for moderate Remainers AND moderate Leavers in favour of a soft version of Brexit. As it is, Farron's strategy is throwing people like his leadership rival, Norman Lamb, and SW England candidates under a bus to please hardline Remain new members.
I think May abandoned Single Market plans because the EU made clear, and with a united front, that that was not possible if the UK were to free itself of the ECJ and freedom of movement, not because of internal party pressures.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39942573
If they only get a handful of MPs on June 8th, will they finally shut the fuck up about a second referendum and accept the result?
No,Mr Mark. We will fight the Conservative-UKIP Dictatorship every step of the way.
Oh good. So you plan to stay a political irrelevance?
And, tout le monde, as for the hunting thing...again... The reason she made that comment was to mobilise foot soldiers from the hunting community to get out to help on the streets. They provide a large contingent and the approach has been successful in constituencies across the UK in previous GEs. It really is not complicated. Will she then give a free vote? Not on repeal of the Hunting Act, too many Blue Foxes, but she might try to use a Statutory Instrument again.
A very cynical move on the part of Mrs May, then. Nobody has any idea whether she meant it or not, it was just to find a few more foot-soldiers for the Tory cause. I hadn`t thought of that.
Presumably May will largely leave ministers in place given most have barely had time to fully settle in yet. You read the odd piece e.g the ineptness of Andrea Leadsom at the dispatch box in the Guardian but the question always is whether this is a leftie journo playing revenge politics with a despised brexiteer or whether they're on to anything . Hunt maybe is perhaps someone who perhaps wouldn't mind being moved given the continued visceral hostility to him by some in the medical profession (as seen in recent days). A promotion to CoE might be pushing it a bit
On the whole I agree and some on here, as usual, are blowing up next to nothing to be a big story. However, one cabinet post that I do think needs to change is DEFRA. The exit from the EU means that a completely new settlement for farming in the UK must be found. To do it right will need someone with imagination, energy and drive.
DEFRA has for many years been a backwater in which second rate ministers on the downward slide can be dumped as a sort of consolation prize. That is not going to be good enough in the next parliament. TM should find someone good to put in there.
Presumably May will largely leave ministers in place given most have barely had time to fully settle in yet. You read the odd piece e.g the ineptness of Andrea Leadsom at the dispatch box in the Guardian but the question always is whether this is a leftie journo playing revenge politics with a despised brexiteer or whether they're on to anything . Hunt maybe is perhaps someone who perhaps wouldn't mind being moved given the continued visceral hostility to him by some in the medical profession (as seen in recent days). A promotion to CoE might be pushing it a bit
On the whole I agree and some on here, as usual, are blowing up next to nothing to be a big story. However, one cabinet post that I do think needs to change is DEFRA. The exit from the EU means that a completely new settlement for farming in the UK must be found. To do it right will need someone with imagination, energy and drive.
DEFRA has for many years been a backwater in which second rate ministers on the downward slide can be dumped as a sort of consolation prize. That is not going to be good enough in the next parliament. TM should find someone good to put in there.
Couldn't agree more.
A good minister in the portfolio will be essential to keeping the shires happy.
Not being funny but why is "Lib Dems make EU referendum pledge" leading the BBC News on the website? How is that news? They've been banging on about it for nearly a year now. That's like saying "PM pledges to take the UK out of the EU" is news.
Perhaps the BBC forgot to mention nit until now?
Or perhaps they only just found out, so it is real news to them?
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU.
I felt a little sorry for the LDs after 2015, getting absolutely screwed over for going into coalition.
But this policy is just a huge incentive to the EU to give us the absolute worst possible deal they can, and as such borders on treasonous, siding with France, Germany and all the rest over their own country's interests.
Have any of our East Mids correspondents got a view on Gedling constituency ? Seems an easy Tory gain on nat trends but then Coaker held on last time whereas neighbouring Broxtowe and similar suburban seats fell (sorry Nick) I can't decide whether 1/3 for the Cons is value, or whether he has some personal appeal there and might keep it close. There's barely any UKIP there - straight up Lab Con race
I grew up in that seat.
He does have some personal appeal, but the Corbyn factor will mean it votes Tory for first time since 1992 IMO.
Plus there was nearly 15% UKIP last time, if I'm not mistaken - easily enough to put the Tories over the top?
Labour's making a serious effort there, and in general the Labour ground game is superior in the Nottingham area. As Peter observes, UKIP got 15% (though the Greens got 3%). Vernon has a substantial personal vote and is running a personalised campaign (non-standard posters for a start) and I've heard a senior Conservative say that demographics there have been moving to Labour (and the reverse in Broxtowe). On current polls the Tories must be hopeful but it's not a walkover.
On Boris's latest exploit, I'm a bit puzzled. I know Sikhs who are quite religious but also quite keen on a drink or two - the Standard is mistaken on that. I think it varies with the particular brand, like Christianity. Perhaps this particular temple is strict on the issue?
If you are a baptised Sikh, then no booze or meat. If you aren't, then these rules don't apply.
Which is good news for the whisky industry.
I think that a lot of Sikhs and Hindus practice total abstinence, but it's not universal.
And, tout le monde, as for the hunting thing...again... The reason she made that comment was to mobilise foot soldiers from the hunting community to get out to help on the streets. They provide a large contingent and the approach has been successful in constituencies across the UK in previous GEs. It really is not complicated. Will she then give a free vote? Not on repeal of the Hunting Act, too many Blue Foxes, but she might try to use a Statutory Instrument again.
A very cynical move on the part of Mrs May, then. Nobody has any idea whether she meant it or not, it was just to find a few more foot-soldiers for the Tory cause. I hadn`t thought of that.
I think we can assume she means it. Of course she might not, being a politician, etc, but her style seems not to be to make promises she won't attempt to keep.
But people know it is never going to happen. The LibDems are W-A-Y more unlikely to have any influence on the next Government than is Jeremy Corbyn, and that is vanishingly small. As one of my Grandpa's inexhaustible supply of colourful expressions would have it, they might as well wish in one hand and shit in the other.....
If you wanted to do something about stopping Brexit, the time to put in the effort was May/June 2016, not May/June 2017.
From July 2016 onwards there should have been a realigning of all those opposed to Brexit with the soft brexiteer/Dan Hannan leaver types. In those early days there was scope to present a sort of majority coalition - if 90% of remainers would prefer a soft brexit, and say 30% of leavers, it would have been a legitimate option. Trying to overturn the result of the referendum was a non starter. It left May with more to worry about from the press and her right than on the remain flank, hence why she decided to abandon single market plans.
I think the Lib Dems could have made more progress against tory remainers by going for that approach, and it is primarily tory voters that the Lib Dems should be trying to win over.
I agree. Farron got too caught up in, in his view, speaking for the 48%.
There's nothing wrong with doing that per se. Contrary to what some Brexiteers claim, winning gets you the right to try to implement your plan, not to silence all opposition or to scream hysterically at people who think your vision is nonsense to shut up or worse.
But the better strategy should've been to speak for moderate Remainers AND moderate Leavers in favour of a soft version of Brexit. As it is, Farron's strategy is throwing people like his leadership rival, Norman Lamb, and SW England candidates under a bus to please hardline Remain new members.
I think May abandoned Single Market plans because the EU made clear, and with a united front, that that was not possible if the UK were to free itself of the ECJ and freedom of movement, not because of internal party pressures.
Yes a soft brexit would have meant largely accepting freedom of movement as is, although there are ways in the EEA to somewhat impose minimal restrictions I believe. But it would have been a perfectly plausible strategy to say "we are making a momentous leap by leaving the EU, let's not rush into it, let's remain in the EEA, that fulfills the people's demand to leave the institutions of the EU, and a view can be taken in later years on whether to continue to distance ourselves or not".
Yes a soft brexit would have meant largely accepting freedom of movement as is, although there are ways in the EEA to somewhat impose minimal restrictions I believe. But it would have been a perfectly plausible strategy to say "we are making a momentous leap by leaving the EU, let's not rush into it, let's remain in the EEA, that fulfills the people's demand to leave the institutions of the EU, and a view can be taken in later years on whether to continue to distance ourselves or not".
It was a political failure within the UK that led us to the Brexit decision in the first place. Taking a cautious approach may have seemed sensible on the surface, but it would not have dealt with the root cause of the problem. May needed to embrace extreme Brexitism in order first to kill off UKIP and, in the next phase, to kill off its adherents in the Tory party.
There is a very funny gif of Theresa May and Phillip Hammond getting on very well... @AlastairMeeks can forward to his friends on here... it's prob too x rated for the mods to publish
Yes a soft brexit would have meant largely accepting freedom of movement as is, although there are ways in the EEA to somewhat impose minimal restrictions I believe. But it would have been a perfectly plausible strategy to say "we are making a momentous leap by leaving the EU, let's not rush into it, let's remain in the EEA, that fulfills the people's demand to leave the institutions of the EU, and a view can be taken in later years on whether to continue to distance ourselves or not".
It was a political failure within the UK that led us to the Brexit decision in the first place. Taking a cautious approach may have seemed sensible on the surface, but it would not have dealt with the root cause of the problem. May needed to embrace extreme Brexitism in order first to kill off UKIP, and in the next phase, to kill off its adherents in the Tory party.
You're right, it wouldn't have dealt with the EU..
That is some good news then, isn`t it? Time to bring back George Osborne.
The most stupid decision of Osborne's career - EU referendum hari-kiri aside.
So who is going to invest in improving poor quality property, then?
Landlords can't ... Osbo has taxed viability away, and there is no point buying poor houses anyway since Clegg-Cameron measures mean that renting out anything below an EPC D will be an offence from 2025, and below a C from 2030. Many cannot be improved to that level without the likes of External Wall Insulation, which has a payback time in decades.
Councils won't invest .. they significantly bailed out of older properties in the 1990s and 2000s because improvement was not viable.
How will purchasers struggling for deposits find two or three times as much cash to bring a property up to scratch?
Are we back to Prescott's gormless "save the market by reducing the supply by demolishing them" gibberish?
Are you going to be doing that investing, Mr Clipp?
We are going to end up with a long tail of owner occupied slums where the owners did not know the responsibilties they were buying into, cannot afford to maintain their houses, or improve them, and believed the pup of anti-landlord policies they were sold.
It will end up with the govt desperately throwing grants at anything that moves, doing the investment half as efficiently as it was done before Mr Osborne's kneejerk.
He was loudly warned at the time; this is his whirlwind and the Tories will have to weather it.
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
Many thanks I think I get all my political needs from real life and PB. So perhaps something non-political to read...
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39942573
If they only get a handful of MPs on June 8th, will they finally shut the fuck up about a second referendum and accept the result?
No,Mr Mark. We will fight the Conservative-UKIP Dictatorship every step of the way.
You undermine your reasonableness, and the perfectly reasonable point of continuing to exist and fight if your party wants, by ridiculously calling it a dictatorship. I don't know if I'll bother voting LD again, as I did in the locals, as they seem a bit bereft at the moment, and their supporters can be quite aggressive to anyone deviating from the true beliefs, to the point I don't think they want my vote, because they only want people who hate their opponents.
But I shall sit down with the manifesto this evening and see what I think.
I haven't checked yet, is it at least shorter than the Labour 120+ tome? I felt it should be short, punchy and focused.
Will more follow, or will he end up saying 'I'm so tired of being alone'
Does it matter? No Republican is going to call for Trumps impeachment unless they want to be Primaried.
Unless Al Green has done some hard coalition building, this is nothing more than grandstanding, to put it out that he was the first to make the call.
Hard to imagine he did this without first checking with Head Office, isn't it, Tim?
My own reading is that the Dems could see an impeachment coming fast, quite possibly initiated by the GOP. Whilst the Dems would certainly want to see him twisting in the wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
Many thanks I think I get all my political needs from real life and PB. So perhaps something non-political to read...
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
Thanks
Topping, you could do worse than trying SAPIENS A brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harrari. It's a terrific read, so far; I'm a third of the way through it. It's also got rave reviews.
Will more follow, or will he end up saying 'I'm so tired of being alone'
Does it matter? No Republican is going to call for Trumps impeachment unless they want to be Primaried.
Unless Al Green has done some hard coalition building, this is nothing more than grandstanding, to put it out that he was the first to make the call.
Hard to imagine he did this without first checking with Head Office, isn't it, Tim?
My own reading is that the Dems could see an impeachment coming fast, quite possibly initiated by the GOP. Whilst the Dems would certainly want to see him twisting in the wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
Am I overthinking this?
I think you are stretching it, Peter. Trump still has some reserves left.
Edit: just bought them (the diaries) - I am very grateful.
Surely the greatest non-fiction work in the English language, on multiple levels (there's a reason I chose my avatar!). But have you bought an abbreviated version? I don't recommend that; part of the point of the full-length diaries is that you get to know all the characters and to follow what is happening day-by day in a way which is completely lost in the abbreviated editions. If you don't want to commit to starting in 1660 and reading all the way through the seven volumes, I'd suggest starting with the full 1665 diary, which covers the plague year and is also a year in which he's sufficiently senior in the Navy Office for there to be a lot of interest in the public affairs he mentions. And of course you'll also get great cameos on private jealousies and his colourful sex life.
If you like it, then you can just keep reading 1666 onwards. I guarantee you'll then want to wrap round and start again from the beginning of 1660.
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
Many thanks I think I get all my political needs from real life and PB. So perhaps something non-political to read...
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
Thanks
Topping, you could do worse than trying SAPIENS A brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harrari. It's a terrific read, so far; I'm a third of the way through it. It's also got rave reviews.
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
Many thanks I think I get all my political needs from real life and PB. So perhaps something non-political to read...
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
Thanks
Topping, you could do worse than trying SAPIENS A brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harrari. It's a terrific read, so far; I'm a third of the way through it. It's also got rave reviews.
I second that. Also, Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall is one of those books (like 'Sapiens') that changes the way you see the world.
And if you are interested at all in the way our brains work as 'story machines' (and what happens when they break, or why certain people hold the extreme views they do) then 'Heretics' by Will Storr will help you realise why reading good fiction is essential to your ability to navigate our extremely complex tribal world.
Will more follow, or will he end up saying 'I'm so tired of being alone'
Does it matter? No Republican is going to call for Trumps impeachment unless they want to be Primaried.
Unless Al Green has done some hard coalition building, this is nothing more than grandstanding, to put it out that he was the first to make the call.
Hard to imagine he did this without first checking with Head Office, isn't it, Tim?
My own reading is that the Dems could see an impeachment coming fast, quite possibly initiated by the GOP. Whilst the Dems would certainly want to see him twisting in the wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
Am I overthinking this?
I think you are stretching it, Peter. Trump still has some reserves left.
Trump has both a thin skin (quick to take offense and get emotional about it) and a thick skin (willingness to continue on regardless of the flak). So don't underestimate his willingness and ability to stare down calls for impeachment.
I think many in the GOP, even right wingers and evangelicals, are very concerned at the progression of this presidency, but it is still a huge ask to get them to go along with impeachment of one of their own before it is clear that Trump has lost his base.
Edit: just bought them (the diaries) - I am very grateful.
Surely the greatest non-fiction work in the English language, on multiple levels (there's a reason I chose my avatar!). But have you bought an abbreviated version? I don't recommend that; part of the point of the full-length diaries is that you get to know all the characters and to follow what is happening day-by day in a way which is completely lost in the abbreviated editions. If you don't want to commit to starting in 1660 and reading all the way through the seven volumes, I'd suggest starting with the full 1665 diary, which covers the plague year and is also a year in which he's sufficiently senior in the Navy Office for there to be a lot of interest in the public affairs he mentions. And of course you'll also get great cameos on private jealousies and his colourful sex life.
If you like it, then you can just keep reading 1666 onwards. I guarantee you'll want to wrap round and start again in 1660.
I agree about "selections" - so went for complete; I hope it's the right one.. I suspect it is one of those thick paperbacks with wafer-thin low quality pages, but that's cool...I might buy it also on Kindle for handleability.
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
Many thanks I think I get all my political needs from real life and PB. So perhaps something non-political to read...
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
Thanks
Topping, you could do worse than trying SAPIENS A brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harrari. It's a terrific read, so far; I'm a third of the way through it. It's also got rave reviews.
I second that. Also, Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall is one of those books (like 'Sapiens') that changes the way you see the world.
And if you are interested at all in the way our brains work as 'story machines' (and what happens when they break, or why certain people hold the extreme views they do) then 'Heretics' by Will Storr will help you realise why reading good fiction is essential to your ability to navigate our extremely complex tribal world.
BBC - The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would "give the final say to the British people". - The vote on the final Brexit deal would include an option to remain in the EU. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39942573
If they only get a handful of MPs on June 8th, will they finally shut the fuck up about a second referendum and accept the result?
No,Mr Mark. We will fight the Conservative-UKIP Dictatorship every step of the way.
You undermine your reasonableness, and the perfectly reasonable point of continuing to exist and fight if your party wants, by ridiculously calling it a dictatorship. I don't know if I'll bother voting LD again, as I did in the locals, as they seem a bit bereft at the moment, and their supporters can be quite aggressive to anyone deviating from the true beliefs, to the point I don't think they want my vote, because they only want people who hate their opponents.
But I shall sit down with the manifesto this evening and see what I think.
I haven't checked yet, is it at least shorter than the Labour 120+ tome? I felt it should be short, punchy and focused.
I too was wondering about "dictatorship". If you have a majority in Parliament, does that always mean you're a dictatorship?
Off topic but Witcher fans it looks like Netflix is going to do a Witcher series!
The gorgeous Eva Green as Yennefer as Vengerberg! Please! That would be the perfect casting!
But then we'd have to wait til like Season 3 or something
Not if it's based on the books, she's in it from the first one.
I see. I do own the first book, but not read it yet - I understand the games a basically fanfiction of their favorite character?
Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?
I am at a loss right now. I saw someone reading Edmund de Waal's The White Road on the tube and thought of that. Anyone?
I just finished John James' Votan. I don't know what genres you enjoy, but it would almost certainly delight Morris Dancer.
I can also thoroughly recommend Pepys' diaries. Took a bit of getting into the first volume, but utterly enthralling.
Now *that* is a good idea (Pepys)! Many thanks.
Edit: just bought them (the diaries) - I am very grateful.
If you are not already well switched on to the history of the mid 17th century, you might come to regret that decision, Mr. Topping. Pepys can be read at the superficial level, the shagging and so forth, but they can also be frustrating if one isn't aware of the political events and characters mentioned by the man. It will be easier these days to find out what and who he is talking about, at least compared to when I first read his diaries, but even with the power of Google be prepared to sink a lot of time into satisfying your curiosity.
Yes a soft brexit would have meant largely accepting freedom of movement as is, although there are ways in the EEA to somewhat impose minimal restrictions I believe. But it would have been a perfectly plausible strategy to say "we are making a momentous leap by leaving the EU, let's not rush into it, let's remain in the EEA, that fulfills the people's demand to leave the institutions of the EU, and a view can be taken in later years on whether to continue to distance ourselves or not".
It was a political failure within the UK that led us to the Brexit decision in the first place. Taking a cautious approach may have seemed sensible on the surface, but it would not have dealt with the root cause of the problem. May needed to embrace extreme Brexitism in order first to kill off UKIP and, in the next phase, to kill off its adherents in the Tory party.
The "I'll make you smoke a whole carton of cigarettes" approach to those dabbling in Brexit.
I suppose if the whole thing does go down in flames, it's possible in 10 years or so that a new PM will take us back into the single market, as Brexit was shown to be a failure. Though I can't see us ever wanting to rejoining the political project, or being accepted if we tried to rejoin. But it's also possible (and I think more likely), that a Brexit car crash will lead to people blaming the EU rather than changing their minds, and relations with the rest of the EU will scarcely be better than with Erdogan for the next decade.
Will more follow, or will he end up saying 'I'm so tired of being alone'
Does it matter? No Republican is going to call for Trumps impeachment unless they want to be Primaried.
Unless Al Green has done some hard coalition building, this is nothing more than grandstanding, to put it out that he was the first to make the call.
Hard to imagine he did this without first checking with Head Office, isn't it, Tim?
My own reading is that the Dems could see an impeachment coming fast, quite possibly initiated by the GOP. Whilst the Dems would certainly want to see him twisting in the wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
Am I overthinking this?
I think you are stretching it, Peter. Trump still has some reserves left.
Trump has both a thin skin (quick to take offense and get emotional about it) and a thick skin (willingness to continue on regardless of the flak).
I think many in the GOP, even right wingers and evangelicals, are very concerned at the progression of this presidency, but it is still a huge ask to get them to go along with impeachment of one of their own before it is clear that Trump has lost his base.
I think it is in the Republicans complete interest to get rid of the obnoxious and duplicitous asshole asap. For the Democrats I agree with Peter - it'll be handy to have him around quite a bit longer
@MaxPB, thanks for your recommendation. I read The Witcher stories in about 4 weeks, and they are very good indeed. An excellent mix of comedy and horror.
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
Many thanks I think I get all my political needs from real life and PB. So perhaps something non-political to read...
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
Thanks
Topping, you could do worse than trying SAPIENS A brief history of humankind by Yuval Noah Harrari. It's a terrific read, so far; I'm a third of the way through it. It's also got rave reviews.
I second that. Also, Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall is one of those books (like 'Sapiens') that changes the way you see the world.
I was somewhat underwhelmed by that. There's a lot that's been covered in other places (for example, Jared Diamond) and a lot that's really sensible.
I guess, the point is that its sensible once you've had it explained carefully.
I agree about "selections" - so went for complete; I hope it's the right one.. I suspect it is one of those thick paperbacks with wafer-thin low quality pages, but that's cool...I might buy it also on Kindle for handleability.
That looks like half of the diary (starting 1665), but is it the Victorian transciption with all the juicy bits cut out? The customer reviews seem to be contradictory on that.
The definitive edition, with excellent notes, is that by Latham & Matthews.
Off topic but Witcher fans it looks like Netflix is going to do a Witcher series!
The gorgeous Eva Green as Yennefer as Vengerberg! Please! That would be the perfect casting!
But then we'd have to wait til like Season 3 or something
Not if it's based on the books, she's in it from the first one.
I see. I do own the first book, but not read it yet - I understand the games a basically fanfiction of their favorite character?
Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?
I am at a loss right now. I saw someone reading Edmund de Waal's The White Road on the tube and thought of that. Anyone?
I just finished John James' Votan. I don't know what genres you enjoy, but it would almost certainly delight Morris Dancer.
I can also thoroughly recommend Pepys' diaries. Took a bit of getting into the first volume, but utterly enthralling.
Now *that* is a good idea (Pepys)! Many thanks.
Edit: just bought them (the diaries) - I am very grateful.
If you are not already well switched on to the history of the mid 17th century, you might come to regret that decision, Mr. Topping. Pepys can be read at the superficial level, the shagging and so forth, but they can also be frustrating if one isn't aware of the political events and characters mentioned by the man. It will be easier these days to find out what and who he is talking about, at least compared to when I first read his diaries, but even with the power of Google be prepared to sink a lot of time into satisfying your curiosity.
I agree that some effort and patience is required, but I don't think you need any particular expertise. It's actually an excellent way in to Restoration history.
The theatre reviews are also marvellous in their brevity and occasional perversity - “…Midsummers nights dream, which I have never seen before, nor shall ever again, for it is the most insipid ridiculous play that ever I saw in my life.”
I think it is in the Republicans complete interest to get rid of the obnoxious and duplicitous sasshole asap. For the Democrats I agree with Peter - it'll be handy to have him around quite a bit longer
Maybe for a while longer but I don't think the Democrats want to be facing Trump in 2020. Trump parked his tanks on WWC Democrat lawns, while keeping more traditional GOPers onboard. It will be hard for them to wrestle those voters back from Trump - and it seems unlikely that anyone else will, if centrist Hillary was unable to bring over any GOPers, despite the talk of it pre-election (and that was the nail in the coffin for her campaign - she could have lost the FOP states if she had swung some of the traditional GOP states from those disgusted by Trump, but the flow went one way). Up against a Ted Cruz or Pence type, it all becomes a much more familiar battleground, and makes it easier for the Democrats.
Yes a soft brexit would have meant largely accepting freedom of movement as is, although there are ways in the EEA to somewhat impose minimal restrictions I believe. But it would have been a perfectly plausible strategy to say "we are making a momentous leap by leaving the EU, let's not rush into it, let's remain in the EEA, that fulfills the people's demand to leave the institutions of the EU, and a view can be taken in later years on whether to continue to distance ourselves or not".
It was a political failure within the UK that led us to the Brexit decision in the first place. Taking a cautious approach may have seemed sensible on the surface, but it would not have dealt with the root cause of the problem. May needed to embrace extreme Brexitism in order first to kill off UKIP and, in the next phase, to kill off its adherents in the Tory party.
The "I'll make you smoke a whole carton of cigarettes" approach to those dabbling in Brexit.
I suppose if the whole thing does go down in flames, it's possible in 10 years or so that a new PM will take us back into the single market, as Brexit was shown to be a failure. Though I can't see us ever wanting to rejoining the political project, or being accepted if we tried to rejoin. But it's also possible (and I think more likely), that a Brexit car crash will lead to people blaming the EU rather than changing their minds, and relations with the rest of the EU will scarcely be better than with Erdogan for the next decade.
Lord King (ex-BoE not ex-BA) reckons that in 30 or 40 years' time, if you were shown a time series graph of economic indicators but with the dates taken off, you will be unable to identify Brexit in there.
A bit like the observation that if you have a 100-year graph of male mortality that includes WW1, you cannot find WW1 in the chart.
We have decades to look forward to in which every good or bad thing that happens will be attributed to or blamed on Brexit by someone. *sigh*
Off topic but Witcher fans it looks like Netflix is going to do a Witcher series!
The gorgeous Eva Green as Yennefer as Vengerberg! Please! That would be the perfect casting!
But then we'd have to wait til like Season 3 or something
Not if it's based on the books, she's in it from the first one.
I see. I do own the first book, but not read it yet - I understand the games a basically fanfiction of their favorite character?
Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?
I am at a loss right now. I saw someone reading Edmund de Waal's The White Road on the tube and thought of that. Anyone?
I just finished John James' Votan. I don't know what genres you enjoy, but it would almost certainly delight Morris Dancer.
I can also thoroughly recommend Pepys' diaries. Took a bit of getting into the first volume, but utterly enthralling.
Now *that* is a good idea (Pepys)! Many thanks.
Edit: just bought them (the diaries) - I am very grateful.
If you are not already well switched on to the history of the mid 17th century, you might come to regret that decision, Mr. Topping. Pepys can be read at the superficial level, the shagging and so forth, but they can also be frustrating if one isn't aware of the political events and characters mentioned by the man. It will be easier these days to find out what and who he is talking about, at least compared to when I first read his diaries, but even with the power of Google be prepared to sink a lot of time into satisfying your curiosity.
Thank you for the advice. I have been making my way up from Henry I (don't ask me why I started there) and have got to Elizabeth and a bit of Charles I. So perhaps I need to brush up a bit before I get going.
Will more follow, or will he end up saying 'I'm so tired of being alone'
Does it matter? No Republican is going to call for Trumps impeachment unless they want to be Primaried.
Unless Al Green has done some hard coalition building, this is nothing more than grandstanding, to put it out that he was the first to make the call.
Hard to imagine he did this without first checking with Head Office, isn't it, Tim?
My own reading is that the Dems could see an impeachment coming fast, quite possibly initiated by the GOP. Whilst the Dems would certainly want to see him twisting in the wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
Am I overthinking this?
I think you are stretching it, Peter. Trump still has some reserves left.
Trump has both a thin skin (quick to take offense and get emotional about it) and a thick skin (willingness to continue on regardless of the flak).
I think many in the GOP, even right wingers and evangelicals, are very concerned at the progression of this presidency, but it is still a huge ask to get them to go along with impeachment of one of their own before it is clear that Trump has lost his base.
I think it is in the Republicans complete interest to get rid of the obnoxious and duplicitous asshole asap. For the Democrats I agree with Peter - it'll be handy to have him around quite a bit longer
Rob, I agree, but I was trying to see it from the perspective of a GOP representative face with a primary challenge if Trump were still carrying his base with him, which appears to still be the case.
Will more follow, or will he end up saying 'I'm so tired of being alone'
Does it matter? No Republican is going to call for Trumps impeachment unless they want to be Primaried.
wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
Am I overthinking this?
I think you are stretching it, Peter. Trump still has some reserves left.
Trump has both a thin skin (quick to take offense and get emotional about it) and a thick skin (willingness to continue on regardless of the flak). So don't underestimate his willingness and ability to stare down calls for impeachment.
I think many in the GOP, even right wingers and evangelicals, are very concerned at the progression of this presidency, but it is still a huge ask to get them to go along with impeachment of one of their own before it is clear that Trump has lost his base.
Thanks Tim
If you've time you might read this rather long and not terribly well written New Yorker article:
I skimmed it and took two things away from it which are important for betting purposes. The first is that the actual terms governing impeachment are fairly loose, and probably deliberately so because those framing the Constitution just wanted to be sure they could get rid of a bad 'un pretty easily if they felt they had to.
The second was that whatever the legal niceties, in practice a crucial factor is nothing more or less than the President's popularity. Trump's is currently in the low fourties, which is bad but not critical. If it gets down to, say, 35% or less he's in serious trouble.
I guess this tallies with your 'losing his base' argument. We're not there yet, but we're not a million miles from it.
Btw I think your characterisation of Trump's thin and thick skin is spot on.
Have any of our East Mids correspondents got a view on Gedling constituency ? Seems an easy Tory gain on nat trends but then Coaker held on last time whereas neighbouring Broxtowe and similar suburban seats fell (sorry Nick) I can't decide whether 1/3 for the Cons is value, or whether he has some personal appeal there and might keep it close. There's barely any UKIP there - straight up Lab Con race
I grew up in that seat.
He does have some personal appeal, but the Corbyn factor will mean it votes Tory for first time since 1992 IMO.
Plus there was nearly 15% UKIP last time, if I'm not mistaken - easily enough to put the Tories over the top?
Labour's making a serious effort there, and in general the Labour ground game is superior in the Nottingham area. As Peter observes, UKIP got 15% (though the Greens got 3%). Vernon has a substantial personal vote and is running a personalised campaign (non-standard posters for a start) and I've heard a senior Conservative say that demographics there have been moving to Labour (and the reverse in Broxtowe). On current polls the Tories must be hopeful but it's not a walkover.
On Boris's latest exploit, I'm a bit puzzled. I know Sikhs who are quite religious but also quite keen on a drink or two - the Standard is mistaken on that. I think it varies with the particular brand, like Christianity. Perhaps this particular temple is strict on the issue?
Comments
DEFRA has for many years been a backwater in which second rate ministers on the downward slide can be dumped as a sort of consolation prize. That is not going to be good enough in the next parliament. TM should find someone good to put in there.
There's nothing wrong with doing that per se. Contrary to what some Brexiteers claim, winning gets you the right to try to implement your plan, not to silence all opposition or to scream hysterically at people who think your vision is nonsense to shut up or worse.
But the better strategy should've been to speak for moderate Remainers AND moderate Leavers in favour of a soft version of Brexit. As it is, Farron's strategy is throwing people like his leadership rival, Norman Lamb, and SW England candidates under a bus to please hardline Remain new members.
Which is good news for the whisky industry.
i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150508144008-election-results-map-exlarge-169.gif
"Prospect of leaving the EU prompts highest employment rate since joining the EU"??
Or perhaps they only just found out, so it is real news to them?
"Speaking of which, anyone any ideas for the next book I should read?"
If you are looking for non-fiction that you might want to try "Rebel" by Douglas Careswell, or Tim Shipman's book about the Referendum "All out War" is well worth a read, not least because it knocks a few myths propagated on this site into a cocked hat.
If you want fiction then you could do worse that to look to Mr. Dancer's collected works for light-hearted and enjoyable romps.
But this policy is just a huge incentive to the EU to give us the absolute worst possible deal they can, and as such borders on treasonous, siding with France, Germany and all the rest over their own country's interests.
Cretins. I hope they lose all their seats.
We'll all need to run for cover if that actually happens.
https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/864835123136606208
So who is going to invest in improving poor quality property, then?
Landlords can't ... Osbo has taxed viability away, and there is no point buying poor houses anyway since Clegg-Cameron measures mean that renting out anything below an EPC D will be an offence from 2025, and below a C from 2030. Many cannot be improved to that level without the likes of External Wall Insulation, which has a payback time in decades.
Councils won't invest .. they significantly bailed out of older properties in the 1990s and 2000s because improvement was not viable.
How will purchasers struggling for deposits find two or three times as much cash to bring a property up to scratch?
Are we back to Prescott's gormless "save the market by reducing the supply by demolishing them" gibberish?
Are you going to be doing that investing, Mr Clipp?
We are going to end up with a long tail of owner occupied slums where the owners did not know the responsibilties they were buying into, cannot afford to maintain their houses, or improve them, and believed the pup of anti-landlord policies they were sold.
It will end up with the govt desperately throwing grants at anything that moves, doing the investment half as efficiently as it was done before Mr Osborne's kneejerk.
He was loudly warned at the time; this is his whirlwind and the Tories will have to weather it.
He also wanted to lift the commitment not to raise VAT and NI.
He's a Thatcherite, she's a Heathite
I can also thoroughly recommend Pepys' diaries. Took a bit of getting into the first volume, but utterly enthralling.
And yes I did buy one of Mr Dancer's recent works.
Thanks
But I shall sit down with the manifesto this evening and see what I think.
I haven't checked yet, is it at least shorter than the Labour 120+ tome? I felt it should be short, punchy and focused.
Edit: just bought them (the diaries) - I am very grateful.
My own reading is that the Dems could see an impeachment coming fast, quite possibly initiated by the GOP. Whilst the Dems would certainly want to see him twisting in the wind, they certainly don't want him gone too soon. He's as helpful to their cause as Corbyn is to the Conservatives, i.e. very helpful indeed. They would prefer him to hang around (pun intended) until a bit closer to the mid-terms, no? In that case it would make sense for a Dem Congressman (step forward Al) to initiate proceedings now, and somewhat prematurely it might appear, so that the GOP is kind of forced to defend him, at least at the outset. This would have the result of delaying and stretching out the impeachment process, all the the benefit of the Dems.
Am I overthinking this?
Look out for the story of the apprentices during the Rump going around calling out "kiss my Parliament"...
If you like it, then you can just keep reading 1666 onwards. I guarantee you'll then want to wrap round and start again from the beginning of 1660.
Looking at interims on our next #ge2017 poll omfg
And if you are interested at all in the way our brains work as 'story machines' (and what happens when they break, or why certain people hold the extreme views they do) then 'Heretics' by Will Storr will help you realise why reading good fiction is essential to your ability to navigate our extremely complex tribal world.
I think many in the GOP, even right wingers and evangelicals, are very concerned at the progression of this presidency, but it is still a huge ask to get them to go along with impeachment of one of their own before it is clear that Trump has lost his base.
https://amazon.co.uk/gp/product/146649686X/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I agree about "selections" - so went for complete; I hope it's the right one.. I suspect it is one of those thick paperbacks with wafer-thin low quality pages, but that's cool...I might buy it also on Kindle for handleability.
I suppose if the whole thing does go down in flames, it's possible in 10 years or so that a new PM will take us back into the single market, as Brexit was shown to be a failure. Though I can't see us ever wanting to rejoining the political project, or being accepted if we tried to rejoin. But it's also possible (and I think more likely), that a Brexit car crash will lead to people blaming the EU rather than changing their minds, and relations with the rest of the EU will scarcely be better than with Erdogan for the next decade.
I guess, the point is that its sensible once you've had it explained carefully.
But, yeah, underwhelmed.
The definitive edition, with excellent notes, is that by Latham & Matthews.
The theatre reviews are also marvellous in their brevity and occasional perversity -
“…Midsummers nights dream, which I have never seen before, nor shall ever again, for it is the most insipid ridiculous play that ever I saw in my life.”
Good for labour? terrible?
LD wipeout?
A bit like the observation that if you have a 100-year graph of male mortality that includes WW1, you cannot find WW1 in the chart.
We have decades to look forward to in which every good or bad thing that happens will be attributed to or blamed on Brexit by someone. *sigh*
Like, are tory donors giving the guy money?
I don't know how Con party agents work.
I imagine he feels he is impregnable.
https://order-order.com/2017/05/17/farage-seizes-osbornes-immigration-revelations/