Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tony Blair: Must we love him or loathe him? Don Brind says No
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tony Blair: Must we love him or loathe him? Don Brind says No
Tony Blair was at his brilliant best in his Sky interview with Sophy Ridge who introduced him as someone people either love or loathe. Blair demonstrated his supreme ability to present evidence and argument in an accessible and compelling way. I didn’t need convincing that Brexit is a looming disaster but it was a joy to hear the case made so impressively.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
just put him out to pasture
Translation - the Germans must pay.
Two women at my work who voted Leave last year, said this afternoon they were now starting to think we'd be better off staying in after all, because the government are "making a total pig's ear of it". Pretty sure this is the first time I've heard someone say something like that "in the real world".
They've always been very Labour-ish people mind, so maybe not typical of Leave voters overall.
Fascinating to read the aforementioned Stephen Bush excoriating Labour's Brexit policy in tonight's Evening Standard which carries an interview with David Cameron.
The role of the ex-Prime Minister is a tricky one - they can bring insight and perspective to a debate and let's not forget Blair and Cameron between them served for 16 years or so there's a lot of experience to draw on.
The problem is that since all political careers end in failure, the likelihood is the departing Prime Minister will leave with their reputation in tatters (or in the case of the current incumbent and to a degree Gordon Brown remain in office with their reputation in tatters) so no one is inclined to listen to them or give them a hearing which is regrettable.
I suspect on Europe there would be very little between Blair and Cameron and indeed both are scathing about their respective parties who have gone on very different journeys since their respective periods in office.
Firstly taking the UK needlessly to war with Iraq on the back of George Bush's coattails.
The second was beating the Conservative Party at three consecutive general elections.
I don't expect his interventions to carry much weight, though.
"When you leave office, you sort of know you can't run back on the pitch and give the ball a kick.
"Well, you can but it is not a sensible thing to do."
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron-tories-must-be-more-inspiring-a3589526.html
If you date the start of measurements back to 1/1/99, then Spain, Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Portugal have all had very similar economic and employment growth, while Ireland is a bit higher, and Italy quite a bit lower.
What did happen is that the periphery grew faster pre GFC (while Germany was "the sick man of the Euro"), and then Germany grew quicker in the aftermath. Now, of course, it is the periphery - particularly Ireland and Spain - that are growing quicker than Germany.
Of course, there is one country that has been royally f*cked in all of this: Greece. The problem is that it is at least partially their fault. No one made them lie to join the Euro. No one made them stay in.
But yes, they clearly shouldn't have joined in the first place. The rest of the Eurozone should be grateful we didn't join!
https://groceries.asda.com/product/berries-cherries/asda-growers-selection-cherries/910003106916
https://groceries.asda.com/product/berries-cherries/asda-extra-special-hand-picked-cherries/910003101304
Both types of cherry are from Kent. Though there are some even cheaper cherries from Spain.
Would the standard cherries be machine picked or is putting the words 'hand picked' on the labelling some marketing exploitation of people with more money than sense ?
Edit - there was a great interview of Blair with Alistair Campbell... You could see Campbell's surprise at how out of touch Blair was... Pretending that Trump would really be okay etc.
But that doesn't stop me believing that he is a truly evil man who committed crimes against humanity that in another era would have seen him thrown in jail or worse. He is a mass murderer who destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives for the sake of a political ideology. In my eyes he will always be guilty and as such should have no part to play in our civic or political life.
However, I am sufficiently convinced that it will be a disaster and I am planning on that basis, selling assets and moving money. I am, quite literally, backing my beliefs with cold, hard cash.
I find the current habit of "making up crimes to suit political expediency" (see bankers, building contractors, etc.) extremely disturbing.
Did he apologise for all the damage his government did to British industry ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykGuOIMGbLI
A few years back I met a semi-famous olive farmer from France, and she said that whilst there were machines to harvest olives, the results were nowhere near as good as picking by hand, with a high proportion of unsaleable olives. Was she lying, or exaggerating for effect? I've no idea.
Now to be fair the Conservatives went along with it fully. The Lib Dems deserve a lot of credit for their opposition.... They say Chirac opposed the war because he had fought in Algeria and seen how hard it would be.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/17/french-jealous-brexit-dont-have-enough-history-do/
Rather incredibly there have been nearly six million views of that on YouTube.
You asked how I voted Leave against my own narrow self interest, which is a fair question. Like SO and many others on here I run my own business, though I don't employ a sole I still turnover around £2.5m.
Some of my clients will be affected by Brexit, which in turn will affect me as they cut back on non-essential insurance.
My business will suffer in the short term but long term I voted for a better Britain for my three daughters and my grandkids.
Ah okay - that's interesting. I had normally heard it expressed the other way that Brexit more likely to be good for elderly and bad for young so I was interested.
In the end, imitation proved the sincerest form of flattery and the Conservatives chose a Blair-like figure who adopted much of Blair's agenda especially on the social side.
One wonders whether had a more traditional Conservative like Davis won in 2005 whether the Conservative message in 2010 would have been enough to win a majority.
While I didn't like him - I think it's clear he gave ministers more responsibility and latitude.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/9425754/Cherries-rich-pickings.html
I more meant compared to your kids and grandkids!
As such I think Davis would easily have won against Brown in 2010. The question of course I can't answer is whether he would have been a better PM than Cameron. I have a strong opinion on that but it is just opinion based on my own preferences.
If you take this party political broadcast from Major at face value, the 97 landslide was an absolute mandate for the UK being part of a federal Europe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLStTx7bIRk
I was talking to two sets of friends at the weekend... Both couples voted leave 'for their children's future'; all their children voted remain. Both couples seemed surprised.
For many youngsters, the notion of sovereignty is outdated and over-rated. Westminster is as remote as Brussels for many and in practical terms just as uninfluencable (if that's a word!)
All these WW2 references are quite insulting but then Sunil seems to have descended into puerilism.
Also, Westminster seeming as remote as Brussels isn't a very good reason to look to Brussels rather than Westminster.
Incidentally, I remember many young people who simply could not understand how a man could be PM, because the only PM they'd ever known was Mrs Thatcher.
Good evening, everyone, and (probably) goodnight, too!
What Lord Haw Haw did is up to him - I am not answerable for him nor am I responsible for any assumptions that you make.
@AnneJGP I respect your view but for many people Westiminster is as remote as Brussels, or Mars for that matter.
'Youngsters' voting for their own future = they just don't understand...
As we're not the ones who are going to have to deal with the long term ramifications of Brexit, that seems particularly perverse.
You should become a Marxist - you seem to have the whole false consciousness thing down.
Hence the analogy to Dunkirk.
Hope is a weapon. Survival is victory.
Maybe a 'Davis is the hardest man in Europe, discuss' thread might do the trick.
So yes, voting to pull powers away from the centre is hugely important and I am indeed doing it for their benefit. Otherwise they become increasingly frustrated and alienated as they come to realise too late that their votes have ceased to make any real difference because all the decisions are being made by people beyond their electoral reach.
This is not the end of the fight for real democracy, only the start.
I do not agree with PR - at least as most people seem to want it - as I believe it gives more power to the parties not less and again subverts the democratic system.
Your final statement is the sort of populist platitude that people who wind up living in the Reichstag along with their small moustache may have said at the beginning of their career. Jingoistic, nationalist, meaningless, nonsense! In fact four words which sum up Brexit!
Very few people who can argue impressively why Brexit will be a disaster are equally able to make an impressive and convincing case for the EU, its direction of travel and why this is and will continue to be good for Britain.
If you don't have a positive case to make, you will - eventually - lose to those who do have such a positive case.
The Brexiteers and Corbyn had a positive case, however daft it may seem to many and whatever doubts many had about the most prominent Breexiteers and Corbyn himself. Remain and May were defensive, took their case for granted and thought that pointing out the obvious deficiencies of their opponents would be enough. Telling people to be fearful is not a case, is not attractive and is not successful, as we have seen.
With all due respect.
In the end I have more faith in people than you apparently.
The counter argument is that (a) the glass is at best half empty and (b) we don't want a glass anyway. The two points are incompatible, but again it's not a particularly inspiring argument to take on.
And I don't feel there's much of a positive case for Brexit. There's an illusion that we'll be more free and in control of our destiny, but in today's world that's not just mistaken but dangeously false - we are opting for shadow over substance. It seems to me clear that if there's a viable project by like-minded people in our continent, we should want to be part of it, not wandering off on our own. I think it will eventiually dawn on us, but probably not till we've wandered for a while.