Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Is it me, or are we suddenly getting quite a lot of YouGov polls, with their exciting new methodology?
I don't want a repeat of the tracker (was that 2010?) when they spammed the media and got vastly disproportionate coverage to other polls simply because they kept on churning them out.
ITV was less than good yesterday when they referred to narrowing polls (fair enough) but gave the impression things were far worse for May than the 3-15 point (or so) vast spread. The polls indicate anything from Con largest party but losing the majority to a landslide, but the impression given was far worse.
The Media have been lapping up Corbyn, and presenting him as far better than he is, over a number of issues.
The media is just totally pissed with "never give a straight answer" TMay. What she's showing is that she hasn't got the mental dexterity to deal with questions. At elections leaders get scrutinised & all TMay has got is platitudes.
TMay is not the most sparkling of leaders, and I agree she struggles with the riposte that others have had - but when we have had those leaders, they have been particularly poor at running the country.
So I will not be prejudiced against her because she's not a celeb, I will judge it on who is best to handle the next 4/5 years.
The Media have their own priorities and to make it more exciting they are exaggerating May's faults and smoothing Corbyn's toxic nature.
You have to wonder how many of those having sport with this election in the media will actually be enthusiastically voting for Corbyn? Not many, if the Ghost of Corbyn Future were to visit them, waving their future tax returns....
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
Reading history books is a terrible habit, I'm always left thinking "I didn't know, that I didn't know that".
After watching the wafflers and non-wafflers of the Labour and Tory leadership, the only regret the British people should truly have is that neither Sturgeon or the soon to be re-elected Robertson can ever (realistically, there are theories) become PM :-)
On present Scottish polls Robertson may well lose his seat
Is it me, or are we suddenly getting quite a lot of YouGov polls, with their exciting new methodology?
I don't want a repeat of the tracker (was that 2010?) when they spammed the media and got vastly disproportionate coverage to other polls simply because they kept on churning them out.
ITV was less than good yesterday when they referred to narrowing polls (fair enough) but gave the impression things were far worse for May than the 3-15 point (or so) vast spread. The polls indicate anything from Con largest party but losing the majority to a landslide, but the impression given was far worse.
The Media have been lapping up Corbyn, and presenting him as far better than he is, over a number of issues.
The media is just totally pissed with "never give a straight answer" TMay. What she's showing is that she hasn't got the mental dexterity to deal with questions. At elections leaders get scrutinised & all TMay has got is platitudes.
TMay is not the most sparkling of leaders, and I agree she struggles with the riposte that others have had - but when we have had those leaders, they have been particularly poor at running the country.
So I will not be prejudiced against her because she's not a celeb, I will judge it on who is best to handle the next 4/5 years.
The Media have their own priorities and to make it more exciting they are exaggerating May's faults and smoothing Corbyn's toxic nature.
You're saying the media are biased against CORBYN ????????
No.
Sorry - I was so flabbergasted I got that the wrong way round.
You're saying the media are biased in favour of Corbyn?
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
That is the sliver of good news for the libdems.
All the people voting tactically are Lib Dems voting for Labour candidates.
I am torn between voting LD or Labour this time just to reduce Graham Brady's majority. Since The LD candidate is a friend of a friend I will probably vote for her.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Crazy theory conspiracy whack job klaxon the Lib Dem decline...... it's because their leader is called Tim. It's a weak and wobbly name. It conjures up images of Herman, and the inescapable truth of being a choker and loser (however unfairly), especially when he was superceded by a man mountain like Murray. I agree with Tim..... sounds like you're agreeing the best day out would be to the exhibition of garden sheds rather than the fun fair. I've lost it. I know. And my apologies to all the Tims out there. It's not your fault!
Mr. glw, reading history is an excellent thing to do. It allows one to learn vicariously, to enjoy the drama of mankind's trials and tribulations throughout the centuries, and to comprehend just how wrong Mr. Eagles is.
Is it me, or are we suddenly getting quite a lot of YouGov polls, with their exciting new methodology?
I don't want a repeat of the tracker (was that 2010?) when they spammed the media and got vastly disproportionate coverage to other polls simply because they kept on churning them out.
ITV was less than good yesterday when they referred to narrowing polls (fair enough) but gave the impression things were far worse for May than the 3-15 point (or so) vast spread. The polls indicate anything from Con largest party but losing the majority to a landslide, but the impression given was far worse.
The Media have been lapping up Corbyn, and presenting him as far better than he is, over a number of issues.
The media is just totally pissed with "never give a straight answer" TMay. What she's showing is that she hasn't got the mental dexterity to deal with questions. At elections leaders get scrutinised & all TMay has got is platitudes.
TMay is not the most sparkling of leaders, and I agree she struggles with the riposte that others have had - but when we have had those leaders, they have been particularly poor at running the country.
So I will not be prejudiced against her because she's not a celeb, I will judge it on who is best to handle the next 4/5 years.
The Media have their own priorities and to make it more exciting they are exaggerating May's faults and smoothing Corbyn's toxic nature.
The idea that the best PM is someone who is photogenic and able to handle public speaking rather reduces the number of potential candidates for said job...
You wouldn't pick a project manager on his ability to handle a TV interview yet we do it for the PM.
The Prime Minister must be a leader, not merely an administrator or project manager.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
Crazy theory conspiracy whack job klaxon the Lib Dem decline...... it's because their leader is called Tim. It's a weak and wobbly name. It conjures up images of Herman, and the inescapable truth of being a choker and loser (however unfairly), especially when he was superceded by a man mountain like Murray. I agree with Tim..... sounds like you're agreeing the best day out would be to the exhibition of garden sheds rather than the fun fair. I've lost it. I know. And my apologies to all the Tims out there. It's not your fault!
Thinking over the Tims I have known (which is few, I admit), they were rarely what I would call decisive...
Another data point for your crazy theory conspiracy whack job
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
630 CHF per month, I have the gold package. It has a really low deduction and specialist coverage included without needing a GP appointment first. It also includes global coverage for emergency care. Overall it's not a bad deal for what I get. My partner has the standard 400 CHF package plus 40 for the global emergency coverage.
Perhaps the media prefer to be booed and insulted by Labour supporters/Lady Nugee, instead of the very polite PM.
They are just bored and hate leaving their cosy metropolitan world called LONDON.
There are now some deeply unpleasant undertones to this election campaign. Mr Corbyn is getting very cocky but this country will be a complete basket case within months, if this man gets into No 10. The team he has around him, are sinister.
Crazy theory conspiracy whack job klaxon the Lib Dem decline...... it's because their leader is called Tim. It's a weak and wobbly name. It conjures up images of Herman, and the inescapable truth of being a choker and loser (however unfairly), especially when he was superceded by a man mountain like Murray. I agree with Tim..... sounds like you're agreeing the best day out would be to the exhibition of garden sheds rather than the fun fair. I've lost it. I know. And my apologies to all the Tims out there. It's not your fault!
Thinking over the Tims I have known (which is few, I admit), they were rarely what I would call decisive...
Another data point for your crazy theory conspiracy whack job
Well I think that has clinched it, I'm publishing!
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
In 1992 he did even better gaining 42 seats and increasing Labour's voteshare by 3.6% but it was still not enough
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
How ironic that our current selection of politicians make "The Grey Man" look like a colossus in hindsight.
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
That is the sliver of good news for the libdems.
All the people voting tactically are Lib Dems voting for Labour candidates.
The Lib Dems polled 8% last time, they aren't polling much different now. More likely I'd suggest the main reason for an increase in tactical vote is UKIP. Sure there's churn in the Lib Dem numbers but the movement is far smaller than the UKIP movement.
Surely young people are exposed to a far wider range of culture than ever before?
They watch cartoons from Japan, TV shows from America, play video games against people from all around the world... They are far more likely to have been abroad, met someone from a different religion etc...
And yet chatting with my son's 16 year old girlfriend the other day, a supposed high flyer at the top of their year, she has no idea where the Pacific Ocean is, further talking showed similar glaring holes in fairly basic factual knowledge. While they seems have have a lot of experience of a range of cultural matters in the way you describe, the number of hard facts in which they are in posession seems woeful.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
Why would EFTA or the EU let us into the EEA on the basis that it's only a temporary arrangement? The 'flexit' plan only works in theory but not in practice.
Is there any suggestion as to who the narrowing polls will help? Is it more beneficial to the Tories in having worried voters turning out to stop Corbyn or does it help Labour as winning becomes a viable option and voters jump on the Corbyn bandwagon?
For all the talk of Momentum stooges manipulating opinion polls, could it not be more likely that Machiavellian Tory HQ are behind the rising Labour numbers? After all a consistent 12-15 point lead and lower Tory turnout leading to an underwhelming victory might be less favourable than neck and neck polls followed by a shock large majority putting May on the front foot and crushing the spirits of the Labour party and returning them to infighting.
Is anyone else is a marginal surprised by the low level of ground activity? I'm within Dewsbury, albeit one of the Conservative leaning wards (that has been passed between Dewsbury and Wakefield). I've had the mailshot from both Lab and Cons, and one hand delivered leaflet each. No door knocking. Nothing at all from the minor parties. Fewer posters around than previous years. I'm led to believe Lab are concentrating their efforts on their core wards, and that the rise in membership over the last couple of years hasn't translated fully into feet on the ground.
A similar story from what I see / hear in other nearby constituencies I visit: Wakefield, Halifax, Colne Valley, Calder Valley (although in the latter, the usual Liberal posters are reduced, and the legacy of hallucinogenic drug use in Hebden Bridge was evident in concentrated pockets of Corbymania).
Mr. glw, reading history is an excellent thing to do. It allows one to learn vicariously, to enjoy the drama of mankind's trials and tribulations throughout the centuries, and to comprehend just how wrong Mr. Eagles is.
I very much enjoy reading history books, but I almost always end up feeling more ignorant than before I started. The gaps in even a well-read person's knowledge are simply immense.
Why are young people apparently turning to Corbyn? They have grown up in a multicultural world and don't hate immigrants, the are too young to remember what more power to the unions and creeping nationalisation could mean. He is taking his time to actually court them and most of all given the complete failure to look into the future past brexit by all parties they are choosing what is to them the least worse option.
They have grown up and been educated in the intensely lefty patisan world of our public education system. They have not been exposed to history, alternative worldviews or reality yet.
I'm afraid I don't buy "with age comes wisdom" line our younger generation have a greater exposure to world events and views than I did during the 60's and 70's and are better informed than I was. Yes with age comes different responsibilities which will alter the way you individually see things but that in itself doesn't confer wisdom.
I do t think age automatically comes with wisdom either, but I don't think the young have any special insight either.
The young are more idealistic. You get more cynical as you grow older until you atrophy into a grump.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
Why would EFTA or the EU let us into the EEA on the basis that it's only a temporary arrangement? The 'flexit' plan only works in theory but not in practice.
Because it suits both parties, no cliff edge and more time to work on a long term deal.
Kezia on board the Jezza bandwagon (apart from his inconvenient statements on another indy ref of course).
The soft sludge SNP vote is being squeezed from left and right. I think we'll see and smell a large expulsion of odorous Nat matter from Westminster's alimentary tract in the near future.
I bow to your unrivalled knowledge of matters Scotch.
At least with the new wave of Kipperscons there's need for any intervening digestive process before the final product.
After watching the wafflers and non-wafflers of the Labour and Tory leadership, the only regret the British people should truly have is that neither Sturgeon or the soon to be re-elected Robertson can ever (realistically, there are theories) become PM :-)
On present Scottish polls Robertson may well lose his seat
I saw the Daily Mail headline on the BBC today Labour death tax they must be in a bit of a quandary with death taxes dementia tax WFA for all their older readers.
Is it me, or are we suddenly getting quite a lot of YouGov polls, with their exciting new methodology?
I don't want a repeat of the tracker (was that 2010?) when they spammed the media and got vastly disproportionate coverage to other polls simply because they kept on churning them out.
ITV was less than good yesterday when they referred to narrowing polls (fair enough) but gave the impression things were far worse for May than the 3-15 point (or so) vast spread. The polls indicate anything from Con largest party but losing the majority to a landslide, but the impression given was far worse.
The Media have been lapping up Corbyn, and presenting him as far better than he is, over a number of issues.
The media is just totally pissed with "never give a straight answer" TMay. What she's showing is that she hasn't got the mental dexterity to deal with questions. At elections leaders get scrutinised & all TMay has got is platitudes.
TMay is not the most sparkling of leaders, and I agree she struggles with the riposte that others have had - but when we have had those leaders, they have been particularly poor at running the country.
So I will not be prejudiced against her because she's not a celeb, I will judge it on who is best to handle the next 4/5 years.
The Media have their own priorities and to make it more exciting they are exaggerating May's faults and smoothing Corbyn's toxic nature.
The idea that the best PM is someone who is photogenic and able to handle public speaking rather reduces the number of potential candidates for said job...
You wouldn't pick a project manager on his ability to handle a TV interview yet we do it for the PM.
If one takes that analogy, there are two choices for your project manager. One who applied for the job, then tries to negotiate down the recruitment process to a single interview, at midnight, up a remote mountain, behind a screen, conducted by the smallest possible panel ideally containing nobody with any specialist knowledge of the subject. And then, when asked about their strategy for (say) IT system robustness, replies "I have been very clear that systems should be robust and will work to ensure the robustness of systems. My instinct is clearly towards robust systems."
The other guy will meet anyone, anywhere, is enthusiastic and happy to talk about his plans in great detail. Unfortunately they involve powering the systems by getting unicorns to run round giant hamster wheels, but a lot of the rest of it sounds legit.
It's not clear which of those is the least qualified.
Why are young people apparently turning to Corbyn? They have grown up in a multicultural world and don't hate immigrants, the are too young to remember what more power to the unions and creeping nationalisation could mean. He is taking his time to actually court them and most of all given the complete failure to look into the future past brexit by all parties they are choosing what is to them the least worse option.
They have grown up and been educated in the intensely lefty patisan world of our public education system. They have not been exposed to history, alternative worldviews or reality yet.
A lefty partisan education system run by the Tories, you mean?
Yes. Gove fought The Blob pretty heroically but could only achieve so much. I think we should go to a 100% vouchers system and close the Department for Education.
The private view from (some people in) effective (Tory) LAs is that Gove dismantled a working system and left large rural areas at risk from a lack of provision. His ideas on competition probably work OK in urban areas with a lot of choice and even greater demand (and crap, dogmatic LAs), but are seen as a problem when the second-nearest primary school is 10 miles away and the local one's struggling. His curriculum changes also whiff a bit of tinkering to suit personal preference. Ofsted became more focused though, which deserves praise.
I struggle to reconcile his periods at Education and Justice. The latter seemed to be surprisingly progressive in comparison, in terms of encouraging rehabilitation rather than chucking away the key. It makes me wonder whether he's easily influenced by a small range of views around him in each job, rather than having the clear ideological vision he's sometimes apparently credited with.
It might not be that he is influenced by different views in each job, and that he does not have a clear ideological vision. People rarely have entirely consistent ideological views, sometimes they can even passionately hold contradiictory ones.
Also he will have had Cameron and Osborne breathing down his neck about financial and political impacts of his policies, and there will therefore be things that he feels strongly enough to go to the wall about, and things he will let slide when under pressure. He might also have done better at education if Cameron had grown a pair and let him stay there until the job was done.
Surely young people are exposed to a far wider range of culture than ever before?
They watch cartoons from Japan, TV shows from America, play video games against people from all around the world... They are far more likely to have been abroad, met someone from a different religion etc...
And yet chatting with my son's 16 year old girlfriend the other day, a supposed high flyer at the top of their year, she has no idea where the Pacific Ocean is, further talking showed similar glaring holes in fairly basic factual knowledge. While they seems have have a lot of experience of a range of cultural matters in the way you describe, the number of hard facts in which they are in posession seems woeful.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
Our RE teacher had apparently been in a Porno mag. I imagine its the only example of that shocking rumour in the country. Have you ever been in a Fiesta Miss? How about a Mayfair? Happy days.
If this is the view our negotiators we are stuffed. Negotiating with someone you are never going to see again and one of the parties gets stuffed by the negotiation is fine e.g. you and the carpet seller. But if you plan an ongoing relationship this is not good. I posted about this yesterday. This is crap negotiating. Deals are successful if you look for the win win scenarios (or minimum loses). I used to represent a number of large organisations who were customers of a particular supplier on an ongoing basis. Both sides understood what the other wanted and gave it away as cheaply as they could get away with, with something they valued greater in return. But they genuinely looked at what the other wanted to achieve. There was no attempt to screw the other side. That doesn't mean the negotiations weren't tough.
Both sides come away happy (maybe not as happy as they would have liked) but better off than when they went in and both sides are happy to come back for more without resentment or likelihood of reneging on the deal
Are we ever going to be buying another Brexit carpet from this seller again? No.
Yes we are. We and they will be back again and again and again negotiating deals on everything covered under Brexit because Brexit covers so much. If it didn't it wouldn't be such an issue. So you negotiate a deal favourable as much as possible to both.
Obviously I have walked when buying a car, house, table, vase, etc, as we all have. These are the carpet seller scenarios. Obviously I have lost deals when against competition. But I have only walked once in a negotiation of this type of scenario (admittedly just a smidgen simpler but still complex) i.e. where it is in the interest of both parties to deal and that was because I was dealing with idiots and could afford to walk.
If we act like idiots, the EU may just decide it is not worth the candle.
Is it me, or are we suddenly getting quite a lot of YouGov polls, with their exciting new methodology?
I don't want a repeat of the tracker (was that 2010?) when they spammed the media and got vastly disproportionate coverage to other polls simply because they kept on churning them out.
ITV was less than good yesterday when they referred to narrowing polls (fair enough) but gave the impression things were far worse for May than the 3-15 point (or so) vast spread. The polls indicate anything from Con largest party but losing the majority to a landslide, but the impression given was far worse.
The Media have been lapping up Corbyn, and presenting him as far better than he is, over a number of issues.
The media is just totally pissed with "never give a straight answer" TMay. What she's showing is that she hasn't got the mental dexterity to deal with questions. At elections leaders get scrutinised & all TMay has got is platitudes.
TMay is not the most sparkling of leaders, and I agree she struggles with the riposte that others have had - but when we have had those leaders, they have been particularly poor at running the country.
So I will not be prejudiced against her because she's not a celeb, I will judge it on who is best to handle the next 4/5 years.
The Media have their own priorities and to make it more exciting they are exaggerating May's faults and smoothing Corbyn's toxic nature.
You're saying the media are biased against CORBYN ????????
No.
Sorry - I was so flabbergasted I got that the wrong way round.
You're saying the media are biased in favour of Corbyn?
They want an interesting fight, and so they are presenting Corbyn in a good light - like the usual left-right politics banter.
Corbyn's extremism (in both political and economic policy) represents a huge danger to this country. But it's being treated as if it's choice between buying a red shirt or a blue shirt.
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
Reading history books is a terrible habit, I'm always left thinking "I didn't know, that I didn't know that".
You are ahead of Donald Rumsfeld in that case....
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
How ironic that our current selection of politicians make "The Grey Man" look like a colossus in hindsight.
Contrast John Major on a soapbox arguing with real voters to Theresa May with a couple of dozen party members and journalists in front of a bus.
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
This might be more relevant if they started fighting/winning the election first....
In every poll the Tories will get a majority bar Yougov but of course Yougov still have the Tories ahead whereas in 2015 they had it tied and the Tories won by 7%
Imagine trying to explain to young people that channels were off-air over night, or even mid-afternoon, and that we had just 4 or even less channels to choose from. Then explain that channels would schedule "boring" programmes in prime time, and you had to watch them because your parents wanted to watch them, and there was only one TV in the house.
On the other hand, where we live there is practically no TV, and almost no internet to speak of (I access PB on a capped, per MB service which runs under 500kbs for most of the day and so is worthless for video). What does my teenage daughter do ? Read! Draw! Swim! Go out with her friends! Talk to her family! All mostly lost arts of modern British kids
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
He gained 40 seats and added another 3.5% to LAbour's vote?
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
There may we'll be some LDs and Blairites tactically voting against Corbyn as PM in that.
A diminishing number I suspect.
The 20% saying they'll vote tactically must be mainly LibDem for Lab and Lab for LibDem (plus the Scottish but that is small in a UK context). It must be mainly LibDem Perhaps this is the explanation of the missing LibDem surge. The are voting tactically for Labour.
After watching the wafflers and non-wafflers of the Labour and Tory leadership, the only regret the British people should truly have is that neither Sturgeon or the soon to be re-elected Robertson can ever (realistically, there are theories) become PM :-)
On present Scottish polls Robertson may well lose his seat
See the front page of today's Herald...
Yes BMG Scotland poll for the Herald this morning has it SNP 43% Tories 30%, a swing of 11% from the SNP to the Tories since 2015 and which would see Robertson lose Moray
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Ben Gummer for Brexit Secretary.
And that last comment by you is wrong, Mrs May has tried to keep the Tombstoners off the candidate list.
Mr. M, I'll have you know I live very near an internet.
Mr. glw, yes but even PB diverges into wonderful tangents such as classical history, Formula 1, trains and so forth.
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
I suspect there are a lot of adults in the UK who wouldn't know what the cold war was either even though they lived through it.
The fault in any case is with an education system which ensures everyone knows about WWII and the Tudors, Romans and then that's it.
Complete and utter nonsense. The whole problem with the old GCSE in modern world history is that it was entirely concentrated on the 20th century. It was killing history before 1870 as an academic discipline.
The majority of schools teach nothing about the Romans. The Norman Conquest is the normal starting point. The Tudors are overprized but the Industrial Revolution is included.
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
That is the sliver of good news for the libdems.
All the people voting tactically are Lib Dems voting for Labour candidates.
If there's one lesson from Holyrood 2016, it's that the LibDems gets Unionist tactical votes (if they appear the obvious challenger).
I was, of course, being facetious.
I am not even attempting to model pro-Lib Dem tactical voting in Scotland. If you look at YouGov's switching matrix the SCons are getting 40% of the 2015 Lib Dem vote! Under universal assumptions that would mean the Lib Dems come out with nothing and that certainly is not going to be the case.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
Why would EFTA or the EU let us into the EEA on the basis that it's only a temporary arrangement? The 'flexit' plan only works in theory but not in practice.
Because until we leave the EU we remain a part of the EEA and if ewe move directly to EFTA we would still remain a member of the EEA.
The EEA treaty is signed by the individual countries and by the EU as a separate member. Leaving the EU does not mean leaving the EEA unless we are in breach of their terms or we choose to leave.
Unfortunately the Government is currently selling Brexit as all abut immigration which precludes EEA membership.
After watching the wafflers and non-wafflers of the Labour and Tory leadership, the only regret the British people should truly have is that neither Sturgeon or the soon to be re-elected Robertson can ever (realistically, there are theories) become PM :-)
On present Scottish polls Robertson may well lose his seat
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
Reading history books is a terrible habit, I'm always left thinking "I didn't know, that I didn't know that".
You are ahead of Donald Rumsfeld in that case....
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."
I was always confused by why people were critical of that statement. Logically it is spot on and even more so when applied to geopolitics.
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
There may we'll be some LDs and Blairites tactically voting against Corbyn as PM in that.
A diminishing number I suspect.
The 20% saying they'll vote tactically must be mainly LibDem for Lab and Lab for LibDem (plus the Scottish but that is small in a UK context). It must be mainly LibDem Perhaps this is the explanation of the missing LibDem surge. The are voting tactically for Labour.
Of course many might see their definition of tactical voting as choosing the Lib Dems where they can't win because they are shit scared of Corbyn but can't bring themselves to vote Tory. I certainly know a few people that would apply to.
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Gummer has a double 1st from Cambridge and is very bright and was 2 years ahead of me at school where he was an excellent debater, his father was also a die-hard Europhile and Barnier will treat him with respect. The EU would also be pleased to see Boris sacked as Foreign Secretary even if a Brexiteer like Davis replaces him
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
This might be more relevant if they started fighting/winning the election first....
In every poll the Tories will get a majority bar Yougov but of course Yougov still have the Tories ahead whereas in 2015 they had it tied and the Tories won by 7%
I'm not worried about the polls; it's just that this sort of story feeds the narrative that the Tories are taking the voters for granted and, as a democrat, I find that really annoying.
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
How ironic that our current selection of politicians make "The Grey Man" look like a colossus in hindsight.
Contrast John Major on a soapbox arguing with real voters to Theresa May with a couple of dozen party members and journalists in front of a bus.
O/T - Serious question to those (like SO) who are so vehement in criticism of the "No deal is better than a bad deal" line of the Government. Taking at face value their claims that they accept that Brexit will happen, what do they actually think the Government should publicise as their minimum red lines.
Hypothetical it may be, but how would they actually react if the EU, say, stated that they will refuse to negotiate any trade deal unless the UK promised £50billion annual payment in return. And that's without even seeing how worthwhile the trade deal would be?
If you don't accept "no deal" as an option, then what is the point of negotiating? And what is the alternative to any fait d'accompli presented by the EU?
It is carpet-haggling 1.01. The guy in the carpet bazaar has to believe you will walk away. Or you get to the point Cameron ended up - where he walked in and said "My man, I am DESPERATE to buy a carpet and I have this much to spend...." - and is then surprised when the guy goes out back and returns with a flea-ridden rug. Which he still ends up proudly displaying on his floor as this great "steal of a deal" he did down the souk....
Carpet-haggling 1.01. They have to believe you will walk out without a carpet. Corbyn has already said he will buy a carpet, regardless. The man is a fool.
If this is the view our negotiators we are stuffed. Negotiating with someone you are never going to see again and one of the parties gets stuffed by the negotiation is fine e.g. you and the carpet seller. But if you plan an ongoing relationship this is not good. I posted about this yesterday. This is crap negotiating. Deals are successful if you look for the win win scenarios (or minimum loses). I used to represent a number of large organisations who were customers of a particular supplier on an ongoing basis. Both sides understood what the other wanted and gave it away as cheaply as they could get away with, with something they valued greater in return. But they genuinely looked at what the other wanted to achieve. There was no attempt to screw the other side. That doesn't mean the negotiations weren't tough.
Both sides come away happy (maybe not as happy as they would have liked) but better off than when they went in and both sides are happy to come back for more without resentment or likelihood of reneging on the deal
Absolutely right. And using your analogy, this deal is more like terminating a joint venture when you still want an ongoing relationship than it is like buying a random carpet from a random seller in the souk.
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Did Gummer not also lead the drafting of the manifesto? He's clearly a tool of the first water.
Surely young people are exposed to a far wider range of culture than ever before?
They watch cartoons from Japan, TV shows from America, play video games against people from all around the world... They are far more likely to have been abroad, met someone from a different religion etc...
And yet chatting with my son's 16 year old girlfriend the other day, a supposed high flyer at the top of their year, she has no idea where the Pacific Ocean is, further talking showed similar glaring holes in fairly basic factual knowledge. While they seems have have a lot of experience of a range of cultural matters in the way you describe, the number of hard facts in which they are in posession seems woeful.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
I can believe they know less facts - I think schools/education policies have moved away from focusing on facts to focusing on critical thinking etc.
RE these days for GCSE has to have two religions I think.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
Why would EFTA or the EU let us into the EEA on the basis that it's only a temporary arrangement? The 'flexit' plan only works in theory but not in practice.
Because until we leave the EU we remain a part of the EEA and if ewe move directly to EFTA we would still remain a member of the EEA.
The EEA treaty is signed by the individual countries and by the EU as a separate member. Leaving the EU does not mean leaving the EEA unless we are in breach of their terms or we choose to leave.
I don't dispute that it's technically possible, but I don't see how it's politically possible.
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
How ironic that our current selection of politicians make "The Grey Man" look like a colossus in hindsight.
It's a funny set of events when the three party leaders are pretty much derided by their own MP's....
BTW...Graham Brady was one of the two sixth form classmate studying Latin. He was painfully shy and a funny looking chap with a huge gap in his nashers. We had a girl who came to join whom Brady could barely bring himself to look at such was his shyness.
Aside from the equality issues, my main critique of single sexed grammar schools (and schools in general) is that it makes boys even more inadequate than they actually are in relating to women. I would be a thousand percent certain that Brady still finds it difficult to relate to women much like many of the other male politicians who went to a single sex school
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
This might be more relevant if they started fighting/winning the election first....
In every poll the Tories will get a majority bar Yougov but of course Yougov still have the Tories ahead whereas in 2015 they had it tied and the Tories won by 7%
I'm not worried about the polls; it's just that this sort of story feeds the narrative that the Tories are taking the voters for granted and, as a democrat, I find that really annoying.
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Ben Gummer for Brexit Secretary.
And that last comment by you is wrong, Mrs May has tried to keep the Tombstoners off the candidate list.
Even most Leavers support that.
I think I have rather more insight into the views of Leavers than you.
I thought you didn't support Mrs May anyway? She shouldn't be trying to keep any faction of the party off the list; let associations make their own choice.
At least her failed campaign means that fewer of the Remainer Spads will be elected than initially thought. Silver linings...
Surely young people are exposed to a far wider range of culture than ever before?
They watch cartoons from Japan, TV shows from America, play video games against people from all around the world... They are far more likely to have been abroad, met someone from a different religion etc...
And yet chatting with my son's 16 year old girlfriend the other day, a supposed high flyer at the top of their year, she has no idea where the Pacific Ocean is, further talking showed similar glaring holes in fairly basic factual knowledge. While they seems have have a lot of experience of a range of cultural matters in the way you describe, the number of hard facts in which they are in posession seems woeful.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
I can believe they know less facts - I think schools/education policies have moved away from focusing on facts to focusing on critical thinking etc.
RE these days for GCSE has to have two religions I think.
Combine that with English, and that is two GCSE subjects where you study fiction, rather than facts.
Surely young people are exposed to a far wider range of culture than ever before?
They watch cartoons from Japan, TV shows from America, play video games against people from all around the world... They are far more likely to have been abroad, met someone from a different religion etc...
And yet chatting with my son's 16 year old girlfriend the other day, a supposed high flyer at the top of their year, she has no idea where the Pacific Ocean is, further talking showed similar glaring holes in fairly basic factual knowledge. While they seems have have a lot of experience of a range of cultural matters in the way you describe, the number of hard facts in which they are in posession seems woeful.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
Again, as somebody who has been head of RS I do not recognise this description of it. In both schools where I have taught it it has been compulsory to GCSE and covers at least five religions plus major ethical and theological issues.
I can qualify that however by saying in the LEA school I worked in (and didn't teach it) although it had two specialist teachers who were very good takeup beyond year 9 was low. It's not considered 'fashionable' by the children. The problem may be less that it's badly taught than that they simply tune it out?
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
How ironic that our current selection of politicians make "The Grey Man" look like a colossus in hindsight.
Contrast John Major on a soapbox arguing with real voters to Theresa May with a couple of dozen party members and journalists in front of a bus.
How did she rise to even be an MP with such a lack pf basic skills? It's toe-curling listening to her wooden soundbites and prepared "answers". impossible to warm to her
I know she is good at other stuff but in an election campaign it's a terrible look.
Corbyn's extremism (in both political and economic policy) represents a huge danger to this country. But it's being treated as if it's choice between buying a red shirt or a blue shirt.
Here you go Neo....
"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue shirt, you wake up tomorrow and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red shirt and I show you how deep the marxist rabbit hole goes. Remember: all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more."
Mr. glw, better to be aware one has gaps in knowledge than glide on in the serene falsehood that one knows everything and is very wise.
I agree, but I think we live in a world where people increasingly think they know about things because they have heard a prevalent opinion on social media, or because they can quickly do a search on Google. I'm not at all convinced that the internet has lead to people having a broader range of knowledge and experience, and being better informed. I think it has actually promoted a narrowing of focus, superficiality, and a siloing of people and views.
I have been saying for months that Corbyn should be flogging the peoples Brexit vs the Bosses Brexit, but I think that message has got through unspoken.
I am expecting a Tory majority, but it is going to be a pyrric victory. They are settingthemselves up for a 97 style Labour landslide in 22.
No this is 1987 with Corbyn doing well enough to survive like Kinnock. That means 2022 is 1992 not 1997
Kinnock conceded a majority of over 100 to the Tories. I'm not sure that was that great a result.
Kinnock gained 20 seats and increased Labour's voteshare by 3% in 1987
Against Thatcher. But he came unstuck against the political Colossus that was John Major....
How ironic that our current selection of politicians make "The Grey Man" look like a colossus in hindsight.
Contrast John Major on a soapbox arguing with real voters to Theresa May with a couple of dozen party members and journalists in front of a bus.
Indeed. How did we ever come to this?
In years to come we might be talking about how great the Tory campaign was, how they carried an unwell, overestimated leader to a sizable majority based largely upon her personal appeal by restricting her public appearances and not allowing enough of the voters to see her limitations.
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
There may we'll be some LDs and Blairites tactically voting against Corbyn as PM in that.
A diminishing number I suspect.
The 20% saying they'll vote tactically must be mainly LibDem for Lab and Lab for LibDem (plus the Scottish but that is small in a UK context). It must be mainly LibDem Perhaps this is the explanation of the missing LibDem surge. The are voting tactically for Labour.
Of course many might see their definition of tactical voting as choosing the Lib Dems where they can't win because they are shit scared of Corbyn but can't bring themselves to vote Tory. I certainly know a few people that would apply to.
Going into the election that was basically my position. Problem is that in my constituency (Ealing Central & Acton) the LD candidate is so crap that I'm going to have to end up voting Tory. Don't know whether that counts as a tactical vote or not.
After watching the wafflers and non-wafflers of the Labour and Tory leadership, the only regret the British people should truly have is that neither Sturgeon or the soon to be re-elected Robertson can ever (realistically, there are theories) become PM :-)
On present Scottish polls Robertson may well lose his seat
See the front page of today's Herald...
12-18 May poll !
Interestingly it almost perfectly matches the YouGov from the same time.
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
This might be more relevant if they started fighting/winning the election first....
In every poll the Tories will get a majority bar Yougov but of course Yougov still have the Tories ahead whereas in 2015 they had it tied and the Tories won by 7%
I'm not worried about the polls; it's just that this sort of story feeds the narrative that the Tories are taking the voters for granted and, as a democrat, I find that really annoying.
What should worry people about the religion of polls is its undue influence on the media and campaigns, especially given they are usually utter nonsense
Is it me, or are we suddenly getting quite a lot of YouGov polls, with their exciting new methodology?
I don't want a repeat of the tracker (was that 2010?) when they spammed the media and got vastly disproportionate coverage to other polls simply because they kept on churning them out.
ITV was less than good yesterday when they referred to narrowing polls (fair enough) but gave the impression things were far worse for May than the 3-15 point (or so) vast spread. The polls indicate anything from Con largest party but losing the majority to a landslide, but the impression given was far worse.
The Media have been lapping up Corbyn, and presenting him as far better than he is, over a number of issues.
The media is just totally pissed with "never give a straight answer" TMay. What she's showing is that she hasn't got the mental dexterity to deal with questions. At elections leaders get scrutinised & all TMay has got is platitudes.
Spot on, she's not the sharpest tool in the box, she's robotic, unnatural and ill at ease.
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
Reading history books is a terrible habit, I'm always left thinking "I didn't know, that I didn't know that".
You are ahead of Donald Rumsfeld in that case....
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."
I was always confused by why people were critical of that statement. Logically it is spot on and even more so when applied to geopolitics.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb made a fortune out of The Black Swan, which is basically just that concise paragraph expanded with illustrative examples.
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Did Gummer not also lead the drafting of the manifesto? He's clearly a tool of the first water.
Since no one appears to have the first fucking notion about what Brexit means, least of all the PM and LOTO or anyone in the EU, it doesn't really matter who leads on Brexit.
New BMG polling for Electoral Reform Soc finds 20% saying they'll be voting tactically. This compares with 9% at GE2015
There may we'll be some LDs and Blairites tactically voting against Corbyn as PM in that.
A diminishing number I suspect.
The 20% saying they'll vote tactically must be mainly LibDem for Lab and Lab for LibDem (plus the Scottish but that is small in a UK context). It must be mainly LibDem Perhaps this is the explanation of the missing LibDem surge. The are voting tactically for Labour.
Of course many might see their definition of tactical voting as choosing the Lib Dems where they can't win because they are shit scared of Corbyn but can't bring themselves to vote Tory. I certainly know a few people that would apply to.
Going into the election that was basically my position. Problem is that in my constituency (Ealing Central & Acton) the LD candidate is so crap that I'm going to have to end up voting Tory. Don't know whether that counts as a tactical vote or not.
I would say that is tactical. If the figure is '20%' and there are so few winnable seats, its safe to assume a large amount of 'tactical' votes will be against the more toxic of the 2 leaders by far (Corbyn) as well as a large amount of pro Union candidate voting in Scotland.
Surely young people are exposed to a far wider range of culture than ever before?
They watch cartoons from Japan, TV shows from America, play video games against people from all around the world... They are far more likely to have been abroad, met someone from a different religion etc...
And yet chatting with my son's 16 year old girlfriend the other day, a supposed high flyer at the top of their year, she has no idea where the Pacific Ocean is, further talking showed similar glaring holes in fairly basic factual knowledge. While they seems have have a lot of experience of a range of cultural matters in the way you describe, the number of hard facts in which they are in posession seems woeful.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
I can believe they know less facts - I think schools/education policies have moved away from focusing on facts to focusing on critical thinking etc.
RE these days for GCSE has to have two religions I think.
Yes.
@SandyRentool you study the facts about a religion rather than training people in it. Don't confuse Religious Studies and theology.
If you want a subject dominated by fiction, try economics...
Mr. M, I'll have you know I live very near an internet.
Mr. glw, yes but even PB diverges into wonderful tangents such as classical history, Formula 1, trains and so forth.
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
I suspect there are a lot of adults in the UK who wouldn't know what the cold war was either even though they lived through it.
The fault in any case is with an education system which ensures everyone knows about WWII and the Tudors, Romans and then that's it.
Complete and utter nonsense. The whole problem with the old GCSE in modern world history is that it was entirely concentrated on the 20th century. It was killing history before 1870 as an academic discipline.
The majority of schools teach nothing about the Romans. The Norman Conquest is the normal starting point. The Tudors are overprized but the Industrial Revolution is included.
Maybe my experience was atypical. But I thought everyone covered the Romans in primary school - that it was compulsory?
Indeed it has those agreements with countries around the world - negotiated on our behalf by the EU, and which will also need renegotiation after Brexit. We have a very deep and profitable integration with the EU that needs replacement with an almost certainly shallower and less profitable agreement. It will happen.
Sometimes the mind boggles as to how thick you are. Do you honestly believe that if we leave the EU with no deal that we won't be able to import medicine or flights will stop running? Are you actually that stupid or just being obtuse to try and make a ridiculous point?
The danger is that lots of countries realise we're under the gun to replace existing treaties, and use the opportunity to make changes that are not entirely to our advantage.
Which is why, as I've said a hundred times already, it is best to think of Brexit as a process, and not as a big bang 22 months away.
Yes, that's why I've always been on the EFTA train, it gives us a transitional period in which we can sort out our global positioning wrt to the WTO and other international trading treaties.
I think there's even a case for keeping the customs union for two years, followed by five in EFTA/EEA, followed by a more bespoke agreement.
Why would EFTA or the EU let us into the EEA on the basis that it's only a temporary arrangement? The 'flexit' plan only works in theory but not in practice.
Because until we leave the EU we remain a part of the EEA and if ewe move directly to EFTA we would still remain a member of the EEA.
The EEA treaty is signed by the individual countries and by the EU as a separate member. Leaving the EU does not mean leaving the EEA unless we are in breach of their terms or we choose to leave.
Unfortunately the Government is currently selling Brexit as all abut immigration which precludes EEA membership.
It does because all treaties between the EU and the leaving member lapse under Article 50 of the TFEU, unless agreed otherwise. That includes the EEA.
Mr. Indigo, that's depressing. Also, I hope you're not having any trouble with the violence flaring up in the Philippines recently.
Mr Dancer thanks for the good wishes. We are currently a few hundred miles from any trouble, which is very localised. I live in the middle of rural community quite a long way from anywhere so I am optimistic it will stay peaceful!
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Did Gummer not also lead the drafting of the manifesto? He's clearly a tool of the first water.
The first draft was fine. It only went to shit when Nick Timothy got his hands on it.
Replacing Davis with Gummer is a disaster for Brexiteers. He's an arch Remainer, and if memory serves has helped to keep Leavers off the Tory candidate list this time round.
Did Gummer not also lead the drafting of the manifesto? He's clearly a tool of the first water.
I felt I had been like someone who didn't realise other planets existed after finishing Norwich's three volume history on the Eastern Roman Empire. The idea of not knowing what the sodding Cold War was is baffling in its ignorance.
Reading history books is a terrible habit, I'm always left thinking "I didn't know, that I didn't know that".
You are ahead of Donald Rumsfeld in that case....
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."
I was always confused by why people were critical of that statement. Logically it is spot on and even more so when applied to geopolitics.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb made a fortune out of The Black Swan, which is basically just that concise paragraph expanded with illustrative examples.
Taleb starts the Black Swann by saying people substitute personal anecdote for rigorous analysis and make huge, foolish, assumptions about people and the certainty of situations due to anecdote and personal background. He then launches into a long personal anecdote about his background to show why his assumptions are completely correct. I still haven't worked out if he was being ironic.
Comments
"With the aging population it is no increase at all"
"Adjusted for inflation it is no increase at all"
"A cynical ploy"
"Only for the next two years"
All of which reinforces the central message.
You're saying the media are biased in favour of Corbyn?
As an aside, what do you pay for your (compulsory) health insurance in Switzerland? £200/month?
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/gummer-lined-up-for-brexit-secretary-in-victory-reshuffle-hq8c70qqf
Another data point for your crazy theory conspiracy whack job
They are just bored and hate leaving their cosy metropolitan world called LONDON.
There are now some deeply unpleasant undertones to this election campaign. Mr Corbyn is getting very cocky but this country will be a complete basket case within months, if this man gets into No 10. The team he has around him, are sinister.
Eddie "the Eagle" Farron? Not so much.....
You don't need a full stop after it, either.
PM.
They might have met someone from a different religion, but they now learn almost nothing about different religions. In my day we did several years of RE, which was to all intents a course in comparitive theology, and explored in some depth the teachings of most of the world major religions, that appears to have all but disappeared because a white english woman teaching people about Islam or Buddism appears to be too controversial.
Is there any suggestion as to who the narrowing polls will help? Is it more beneficial to the Tories in having worried voters turning out to stop Corbyn or does it help Labour as winning becomes a viable option and voters jump on the Corbyn bandwagon?
For all the talk of Momentum stooges manipulating opinion polls, could it not be more likely that Machiavellian Tory HQ are behind the rising Labour numbers? After all a consistent 12-15 point lead and lower Tory turnout leading to an underwhelming victory might be less favourable than neck and neck polls followed by a shock large majority putting May on the front foot and crushing the spirits of the Labour party and returning them to infighting.
Not that I believe any of that myself
A similar story from what I see / hear in other nearby constituencies I visit: Wakefield, Halifax, Colne Valley, Calder Valley (although in the latter, the usual Liberal posters are reduced, and the legacy of hallucinogenic drug use in Hebden Bridge was evident in concentrated pockets of Corbymania).
At least with the new wave of Kipperscons there's need for any intervening digestive process before the final product.
Mr. Wheel, I've backed the Lib Dems to get under 10% again. Farron claimed yesterday their polling was rising. It isn't.
For what it's worth, in certain seats I'd vote tactically for them (Cambridge being one) but I don't think they're going to enjoy the election night.
The other guy will meet anyone, anywhere, is enthusiastic and happy to talk about his plans in great detail. Unfortunately they involve powering the systems by getting unicorns to run round giant hamster wheels, but a lot of the rest of it sounds legit.
It's not clear which of those is the least qualified.
Have you ever been in a Fiesta Miss? How about a Mayfair?
Happy days.
Obviously I have walked when buying a car, house, table, vase, etc, as we all have. These are the carpet seller scenarios. Obviously I have lost deals when against competition. But I have only walked once in a negotiation of this type of scenario (admittedly just a smidgen simpler but still complex) i.e. where it is in the interest of both parties to deal and that was because I was dealing with idiots and could afford to walk.
If we act like idiots, the EU may just decide it is not worth the candle.
They want an interesting fight, and so they are presenting Corbyn in a good light - like the usual left-right politics banter.
Corbyn's extremism (in both political and economic policy) represents a huge danger to this country. But it's being treated as if it's choice between buying a red shirt or a blue shirt.
"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones."
The 20% saying they'll vote tactically must be mainly LibDem for Lab and Lab for LibDem (plus the Scottish but that is small in a UK context). It must be mainly LibDem Perhaps this is the explanation of the missing LibDem surge. The are voting tactically for Labour.
And that last comment by you is wrong, Mrs May has tried to keep the Tombstoners off the candidate list.
Even most Leavers support that.
The majority of schools teach nothing about the Romans. The Norman Conquest is the normal starting point. The Tudors are overprized but the Industrial Revolution is included.
I am not even attempting to model pro-Lib Dem tactical voting in Scotland. If you look at YouGov's switching matrix the SCons are getting 40% of the 2015 Lib Dem vote! Under universal assumptions that would mean the Lib Dems come out with nothing and that certainly is not going to be the case.
The EEA treaty is signed by the individual countries and by the EU as a separate member. Leaving the EU does not mean leaving the EEA unless we are in breach of their terms or we choose to leave.
Unfortunately the Government is currently selling Brexit as all abut immigration which precludes EEA membership.
zhi zhi wei zhi zhi, bu zhi wei bu zhi, shi zhi ye
knowing what you know and knowing what you don't know - that is knowledge
RE these days for GCSE has to have two religions I think.
BTW...Graham Brady was one of the two sixth form classmate studying Latin. He was painfully shy and a funny looking chap with a huge gap in his nashers. We had a girl who came to join whom Brady could barely bring himself to look at such was his shyness.
Aside from the equality issues, my main critique of single sexed grammar schools (and schools in general) is that it makes boys even more inadequate than they actually are in relating to women. I would be a thousand percent certain that Brady still finds it difficult to relate to women much like many of the other male politicians who went to a single sex school
https://twitter.com/DavidRobson84/status/868048643055603713
I thought you didn't support Mrs May anyway? She shouldn't be trying to keep any faction of the party off the list; let associations make their own choice.
At least her failed campaign means that fewer of the Remainer Spads will be elected than initially thought. Silver linings...
I can qualify that however by saying in the LEA school I worked in (and didn't teach it) although it had two specialist teachers who were very good takeup beyond year 9 was low. It's not considered 'fashionable' by the children. The problem may be less that it's badly taught than that they simply tune it out?
I know she is good at other stuff but in an election campaign it's a terrible look.
"This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue shirt, you wake up tomorrow and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red shirt and I show you how deep the marxist rabbit hole goes. Remember: all I'm offering is the truth. Nothing more."
https://twitter.com/edballs/status/869675189465952256
But, in the land of the blind...
@SandyRentool you study the facts about a religion rather than training people in it. Don't confuse Religious Studies and theology.
If you want a subject dominated by fiction, try economics...
But I thought everyone covered the Romans in primary school - that it was compulsory?
GCSE history is not compulsory.