Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump’s attacks on the media are simply failing to resonate an

SystemSystem Posts: 11,721
edited August 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump’s attacks on the media are simply failing to resonate and he’s well behind in 2020 match-ups

Trump's attacks on the media not resonating. This from @ppppolls pic.twitter.com/3YRnSBrigb

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    First! Like Mrs May, LEAVE and No!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    which doesn’t look good politically for the future.

    IF he survives this term, I very much doubt he'll run again - he'll have four years to address the many challenges faced by the 'deplorables' - and he'll fail (because very few of them have easy, if any solutions) - so he'll end up as 'another Washington politician who betrayed us' - and I don't think Trump is enjoying it much - I suspect he's finding it much harder than he anticipated....
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,211

    which doesn’t look good politically for the future.

    IF he survives this term, I very much doubt he'll run again - he'll have four years to address the many challenges faced by the 'deplorables' - and he'll fail (because very few of them have easy, if any solutions) - so he'll end up as 'another Washington politician who betrayed us' - and I don't think Trump is enjoying it much - I suspect he's finding it much harder than he anticipated....

    I think that's absolutely spot on.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022
    MSNBC? Fake news poll.

    :D
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Some interesting vox pops by Trump supporters at the Phoenix rally.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/23/trump-supporter-interviews-phoenix-arizona-rally

    The emperor still has a fine suit of clothes in their eyes.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,062
    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.
    Yes, it's very, very likely that the Republicans will do badly in the mid term elections, and that Trump will be a one term president - if he makes it that far. But until he is actually gone I remain uneasy. There remains the outside chance that events conspire in his favour.
    A buffoon without political or moral scruple, whom a third of the country will back without hesitation, remains dangerous.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    RobD said:

    MSNBC? Fake news poll.

    :D

    Poll is legit:

    Trump Holds Steady After Charlottesville; Supporters Think Whites, Christians Face Discrimination

    PPP's newest national poll finds that Donald Trump's approval rating is pretty steady in the wake of the Charlottesville attack, probably because his supporters think that whites and Christians are the most oppressed groups of people in the country. 40% of voters approve of the job Trump is doing to 53% who disapprove, little change from the 41/55 spread we found for him in July.


    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2017/08/trump-holds-steady-after-charlottesville-supporters-think-whites-christians-face-discrimination.html
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    RobD said:

    MSNBC? Fake news poll.

    :D

    Poll is legit:

    Trump Holds Steady After Charlottesville; Supporters Think Whites, Christians Face Discrimination

    PPP's newest national poll finds that Donald Trump's approval rating is pretty steady in the wake of the Charlottesville attack, probably because his supporters think that whites and Christians are the most oppressed groups of people in the country. 40% of voters approve of the job Trump is doing to 53% who disapprove, little change from the 41/55 spread we found for him in July.


    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2017/08/trump-holds-steady-after-charlottesville-supporters-think-whites-christians-face-discrimination.html
    I was just imagining Trump's reaction. :p
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.
    Yes, it's very, very likely that the Republicans will do badly in the mid term elections, and that Trump will be a one term president - if he makes it that far. But until he is actually gone I remain uneasy. There remains the outside chance that events conspire in his favour.
    A buffoon without political or moral scruple, whom a third of the country will back without hesitation, remains dangerous.

    I agree, the Trump cult doesn't look like ending any time soon. It is immune to reality.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,019
    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.

    They certainly have a perspective very different from the mainstream:

    Asked what racial group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 45% of Trump voters say it's white people followed by 17% for Native Americans with 16% picking African Americans, and 5% picking Latinos. Asked what religious group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 54% of Trump voters says it's Christians followed by 22% for Muslims and 12% for Jews. There is a mindset among many Trump voters that it's whites and Christians getting trampled on in America that makes it unlikely they would abandon Trump over his 'both sides' rhetoric.
  • Options
    freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.
    Yes, it's very, very likely that the Republicans will do badly in the mid term elections, and that Trump will be a one term president - if he makes it that far. But until he is actually gone I remain uneasy. There remains the outside chance that events conspire in his favour.
    A buffoon without political or moral scruple, whom a third of the country will back without hesitation, remains dangerous.

    In fairness you could apply that last sentence to all if not most of our PMs
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    Not sure there is much of a story here yet if you remember that more people voted for Clinton.
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.

    They certainly have a perspective very different from the mainstream:

    Asked what racial group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 45% of Trump voters say it's white people followed by 17% for Native Americans with 16% picking African Americans, and 5% picking Latinos. Asked what religious group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 54% of Trump voters says it's Christians followed by 22% for Muslims and 12% for Jews. There is a mindset among many Trump voters that it's whites and Christians getting trampled on in America that makes it unlikely they would abandon Trump over his 'both sides' rhetoric.
    As Trump won 30 of the 50 states I'm not sure how you are defining "very different" and "mainstream".
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,118
    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    That’s a good point. What, in your view, is the chance f the bill passing? As an ousider, with no idea of the pros and cons, I would have expected ‘good'.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,252
    edited August 2017
    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,027
    Good morning, everyone.

    Whilst I agree Trump's not looking great for 2020, those who dislike him now are in favour of the ephemeral, until an actual alternative emerges. Those who support him know what they're supporting.

    It's a little like best successor to May polling, which is more about name recognition than a firm conviction that X, Y or Z would do a better job.

    Come 2020, if he stands again (I suspect he may not) then people will not have Trump or Not Trump, but Trump or Candidate X.

    I'd expect the gap to narrow a little in Trump's favour.
  • Options
    freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    Another day, another tranche of anti Brexit nonsense.

    Give it up mate, you're as boring as fuck.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,019
    GeoffM said:

    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.

    They certainly have a perspective very different from the mainstream:

    Asked what racial group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 45% of Trump voters say it's white people followed by 17% for Native Americans with 16% picking African Americans, and 5% picking Latinos. Asked what religious group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 54% of Trump voters says it's Christians followed by 22% for Muslims and 12% for Jews. There is a mindset among many Trump voters that it's whites and Christians getting trampled on in America that makes it unlikely they would abandon Trump over his 'both sides' rhetoric.
    As Trump won 30 of the 50 states I'm not sure how you are defining "very different" and "mainstream".
    Yes, NY and California are only two states out of 50, even if all the media people live and work there.

    Same with London and the UK, as newsreader Jon Snow recently observed.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4818026/I-m-touch-elite-says-Channel-4-s-Jon-Snow.html
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,251

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    Isn't that what leadership is - or is meant to be - about? Explaining to voters the consequences, choices and trade-offs of their votes? Not that their choice is rotten but that their choice means this and not this? Etc....

    The issue seems to me less about whether the voters made the right or wrong choice but rather that, in the time since the referendum, politicians have not set out what the choices are which now need to be made, the costs and benefits, who bears them, what trade offs there need to be, the advantages and disadvantages of both. Rather the debate has been about whether they should have voted Leave or Remain (pointless at this stage) or about insulting the other side.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,498
    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    GeoffM said:

    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.

    They certainly have a perspective very different from the mainstream:

    Asked what racial group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 45% of Trump voters say it's white people followed by 17% for Native Americans with 16% picking African Americans, and 5% picking Latinos. Asked what religious group they think faces the most discrimination in America, 54% of Trump voters says it's Christians followed by 22% for Muslims and 12% for Jews. There is a mindset among many Trump voters that it's whites and Christians getting trampled on in America that makes it unlikely they would abandon Trump over his 'both sides' rhetoric.
    As Trump won 30 of the 50 states I'm not sure how you are defining "very different" and "mainstream".
    The view that White Christians face the most discrimination is not one you'll find much support for in mainstream media or the commentariat.

    It may well be what it feels like to them - but I suspect data to back it up will be thin on the ground.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    It's like being in a convoy: you'll go faster but not get to choose the destination
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,019

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    That’s a good point. What, in your view, is the chance f the bill passing? As an ousider, with no idea of the pros and cons, I would have expected ‘good'.
    I would have thought that Republicans up for re-election next year would welcome the move!

    This isn’t healthcare reform, where it’s easy to identify a large and vocal group of ‘losers’, this is a truly massive amount of cash that large companies are saying they will invest in factories, R&D operations and dividends to shareholders (your pension fund!) - at the same time as allowing huge numbers of jobs to be created in replacing old bridges, roads, rail and pipelines. Maybe even a wall on the Mexican border to keep Trump’s fans happy.

    The only obvious downsides are a possible dose of inflation as this cash works its way through the economy, and objections from some Democrats who think that large companies should pay their ‘fair’ share of corporation taxes on overseas income.

    I’m no expert on the nuances of American congressional politics, but I’d imagine this is as close to a no-brainier as it’s possible to get.

    Expect to see the bill soon, possibly at the same time as the row over the ‘debt ceiling’, a situation whereby Congreessional approval is needed to extend government borrowing. This has a hard deadline and leads to a complete shutdown of government the day the money runs out, if there’s no agreement as salaries and suppliers can’t be paid.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,926
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
    Apparently last time it didn't work out great - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/26/what-happened-the-last-time-companies-got-a-break-on-overseas-profits.html

    Money was ploughed into share buy-backs and dividends, and many of the biggest beneficiaries cut jobs.

    "The CRS cited a series of reports into the benefits of repatriation, with a common theme that the 2004 program was "an ineffective means of increasing economic growth."

    Maybe Trump will do better, but it seems premature to assume this will get him re-elected.

    As an aside- I think the US economy is doing pretty well... yet Trump's ratings continue to decline.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    The 37% is more interesting than the 46%. These are the some of the people that you can fool all of the time and right now they're sticking with Donald Trump,
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,498
    Cyclefree said:

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    Isn't that what leadership is - or is meant to be - about? Explaining to voters the consequences, choices and trade-offs of their votes? Not that their choice is rotten but that their choice means this and not this? Etc....

    The issue seems to me less about whether the voters made the right or wrong choice but rather that, in the time since the referendum, politicians have not set out what the choices are which now need to be made, the costs and benefits, who bears them, what trade offs there need to be, the advantages and disadvantages of both. Rather the debate has been about whether they should have voted Leave or Remain (pointless at this stage) or about insulting the other side.
    I think the problem with that is that politics doesn't work that way. It needs to be simplistic to the point of stupid. So remain painted a picture of Armageddon without the good bits and leave painted a picture of nirvana with added sex. Neither side made any genuine attempt to measure the relatively small pluses and minuses that come from leaving let alone allow people to come to a sensible view.

    It is indeed unfortunate that people are still doing the Armageddon/nirvana thing instead of focussing on minimising the undoubted minuses and accentuating the positives. So, for example, those who thought we should remain probably also think that we should remain in a customs union. They should be making that case or at least focussing on what we get out of the customs union rather than wailing about the end of times and wishing it was all not going to happen at all.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    Which of the following groups do you think faces the most discrimination in America today: African Americans, Asian Americans, Latino Americans, Native Americans, or white people?

    Overall (Trump Voters)
    African Americans ......................................... 37% (16%)
    White people...................................................21% (45%)
    Native Americans ...........................................14% (17%)
    AsianAmericans............................................... 2%
    LatinoAmericans....................................... ..... 8% (5%)
    Not sure ........................................................ 17%

    Which of the following groups do you think faces the most discrimination in America today: Christians, Jews, or Muslims?

    Overall (Trump Voters)
    Muslims........................................................... 49% (22%)
    Christians ........................................................ 29% (45%)
    Jews................................................................... 8% (12%)
    Not sure .......................................................... 14%

    I imagine the gap between 'Trump voters' and not Trump voters will be even wider.
  • Options
    RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679
    Charles said:

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    It's like being in a convoy: you'll go faster but not get to choose the destination
    It isn't much like being in a convoy though is it. I am still working out the consequences of running a business with a weak currency while trying to compete in a big market with a much stronger one. The idea that we can now choose our own destination isn't one that comes up much.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,498
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
    Apparently last time it didn't work out great - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/26/what-happened-the-last-time-companies-got-a-break-on-overseas-profits.html

    Money was ploughed into share buy-backs and dividends, and many of the biggest beneficiaries cut jobs.

    "The CRS cited a series of reports into the benefits of repatriation, with a common theme that the 2004 program was "an ineffective means of increasing economic growth."

    Maybe Trump will do better, but it seems premature to assume this will get him re-elected.

    As an aside- I think the US economy is doing pretty well... yet Trump's ratings continue to decline.
    I think that is exactly why they will want to increase the conditionality but even that money must have bled into the general economy boosting demand and asset prices. The sheer scale of this means it will be QE on stilts and it should help the economy in the short term. Whether that helps Trump is of course another question.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
    Apparently last time it didn't work out great - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/26/what-happened-the-last-time-companies-got-a-break-on-overseas-profits.html

    Money was ploughed into share buy-backs and dividends, and many of the biggest beneficiaries cut jobs.

    "The CRS cited a series of reports into the benefits of repatriation, with a common theme that the 2004 program was "an ineffective means of increasing economic growth."

    Maybe Trump will do better, but it seems premature to assume this will get him re-elected.

    As an aside- I think the US economy is doing pretty well... yet Trump's ratings continue to decline.
    It is a truism that GOP voters are an alliance of the rich voting for tax cuts and the poor voting for God. Share buybacks and increased dividends will do a great deal for the first group. You are probably right that it won't create many jobs for the second.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    edited August 2017

    I imagine the gap between 'Trump voters' and not Trump voters will be even wider.

    Yep:

    Which of the following groups do you think faces the most discrimination in America today: African Americans, Asian Americans, Latino Americans, Native Americans, or white people?

    Clinton Voters (Trump Voters)
    African Americans ......................................... 58% (16%)
    White people.................................................... 5% (45%)
    Native Americans ............................................ 9% (17%)
    AsianAmericans............................................... 1% (3%)
    LatinoAmericans.............................................. 13% (5%)
    Not sure ..........................................................13% (13%)%

    Which of the following groups do you think faces the most discrimination in America today: Christians, Jews, or Muslims?

    Clinton Voters (Trump Voters)
    Muslims........................................................... 77% (22%)
    Christians .......................................................... 8% (45%)
    Jews................................................................... 5% (12%)
    Not sure .......................................................... 11% (12%)

    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2017/PPP_Release_National_82317.pdf
  • Options
    ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,819

    which doesn’t look good politically for the future.

    IF he survives this term, I very much doubt he'll run again - he'll have four years to address the many challenges faced by the 'deplorables' - and he'll fail (because very few of them have easy, if any solutions) - so he'll end up as 'another Washington politician who betrayed us' - and I don't think Trump is enjoying it much - I suspect he's finding it much harder than he anticipated....

    While all of that's true I can't see him stepping aside no matter how unpopular he becomes. He's a narcissist above all else, and you can't beat being President for that. Stepping down would mean admitting failure which he will never do. More likely is him being challenged and losing in the primaries.
  • Options
    TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    The problem for politicians is that sooner or later they will be accountable for the real decisions that the country has to make, and they know that they aren't equipped for it. The party machines have brought to parliament the under prepared, the party mouthpiece and the showboat - not the brightest and the best.

    It's part of the reason I voted to leave - they haven't the skill of the average Parish council, because they are increasingly engaged in issues that don't require it. And when important issues come up, they fudge them and leave the mess under the carpet for the next ill prepared minister. The only way this improves is if the standing of the job improves - and that will require the Parliament of these Islands to have real power again. They shouldn't be discussing children's lunchboxes, or five a day targets.
  • Options
    WinstanleyWinstanley Posts: 434
    edited August 2017

    Which of the following groups do you think faces the most discrimination in America today: African Americans, Asian Americans, Latino Americans, Native Americans, or white people?

    Overall (Trump Voters)
    African Americans ......................................... 37% (16%)
    White people...................................................21% (45%)
    Native Americans ...........................................14% (17%)
    AsianAmericans............................................... 2%
    LatinoAmericans....................................... ..... 8% (5%)
    Not sure ........................................................ 17%

    Which of the following groups do you think faces the most discrimination in America today: Christians, Jews, or Muslims?

    Overall (Trump Voters)
    Muslims........................................................... 49% (22%)
    Christians ........................................................ 29% (45%)
    Jews................................................................... 8% (12%)
    Not sure .......................................................... 14%

    I imagine the gap between 'Trump voters' and not Trump voters will be even wider.

    Did the Trump voters think native meant white US citizens? As opposed to 'Indians'.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,187
    edited August 2017



    I imagine the gap between 'Trump voters' and not Trump voters will be even wider.

    Arithmetically it must be. And if you know the number of Trump/nonTrump voters in the sample you can say exactly.

    edit, p.s. you've answered this yourself.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,019
    DavidL said:

    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
    Apparently last time it didn't work out great - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/26/what-happened-the-last-time-companies-got-a-break-on-overseas-profits.html

    Money was ploughed into share buy-backs and dividends, and many of the biggest beneficiaries cut jobs.

    "The CRS cited a series of reports into the benefits of repatriation, with a common theme that the 2004 program was "an ineffective means of increasing economic growth."

    Maybe Trump will do better, but it seems premature to assume this will get him re-elected.

    As an aside- I think the US economy is doing pretty well... yet Trump's ratings continue to decline.
    I think that is exactly why they will want to increase the conditionality but even that money must have bled into the general economy boosting demand and asset prices. The sheer scale of this means it will be QE on stilts and it should help the economy in the short term. Whether that helps Trump is of course another question.
    Yes, the scale of it is enormous. Assuming $2.5trn at 10% tax, that adds something like 7% to the federal income.

    The British equivalent numbers would be about £400bn brought onshore generating £40bn in tax. That’s a lot of infrastructure spending and a lot of extra money in the economy.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    TonyE said:

    It's part of the reason I voted to leave - they haven't the skill of the average Parish council, because they are increasingly engaged in issues that don't require it. And when important issues come up, they fudge them and leave the mess under the carpet for the next ill prepared minister. The only way this improves is if the standing of the job improves - and that will require the Parliament of these Islands to have real power again. They shouldn't be discussing children's lunchboxes, or five a day targets.

    You think Brexit will make MPs smarter?

    Wow
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,252
    TonyE said:

    It's part of the reason I voted to leave - they haven't the skill of the average Parish council, because they are increasingly engaged in issues that don't require it. And when important issues come up, they fudge them and leave the mess under the carpet for the next ill prepared minister. The only way this improves is if the standing of the job improves - and that will require the Parliament of these Islands to have real power again. They shouldn't be discussing children's lunchboxes, or five a day targets.

    You have put your finger on a real problem but have come up with a wrong-headed solution.

    The reason that Westminster politicians are ill-equipped for decision making at the national level is that the country is too centralised and the political culture treats parliament as a giant parish council. Perhaps nowhere is the more apparent than in the ongoing use of the health service as a political football. If Westminster politicians were left to deal only with decisions that really need to be taken at UK level, they wouldn't be able to hide behind trivialities.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,564
    Meanwhile, the important stuff is being done in the White House:

    https://www.axios.com/the-white-house-reveals-a-renovated-west-wing-2476242788.html

    "The Oval Office refresh featured new wallpaper and a rug used by Ronald Reagan, at least until Trump designs his own floor covering, which might necessitate more new wallpaper."
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844

    Meanwhile, the important stuff is being done in the White House:

    https://www.axios.com/the-white-house-reveals-a-renovated-west-wing-2476242788.html

    "The Oval Office refresh featured new wallpaper and a rug used by Ronald Reagan, at least until Trump designs his own floor covering, which might necessitate more new wallpaper."

    "The Obama wallpaper was very damaged. There were a lot of stains on it."

    The mind boggles......
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    Trump's approval ratings are the lowest for any incumbent postwar President at this stage with onpy Bill Clinton anywhere near as bad. The fact the Democrats were crushed in the 1994 midterms and lost both chambers of Congress should give the GOP serious cause for concern next year, especially with so many saying they will vote against Congressmen who voted to repeal Obamacare and the GOP base gaving little enthusiasm for Ryan and McConnell. However Trump himself can take a little comfort from the fact that although Bill Clinton badly trailed leading 1996 GOP contenders like Bob Dole by the general election he was re elected
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    "Europe’s failure to send home rejected asylum seekers is worsening the migrant crisis, senior figures in Brussels believe.

    An economic migrant who survives the journey across the Mediterranean has a 73 per cent chance of remaining in the EU even if served with an order to leave, official statistics show.

    Less than a third of those told to leave are removed, creating an incentive for economic migrants to join refugees striving to reach Europe.

    The latest figures for migrant arrivals show a surge from African and Asian countries with historically lower rates of recognition of refugee status than states such as Syria and Eritrea, suggesting that many people may be moving for economic reasons."

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/eu-s-failure-over-illegal-migrants-fuels-crisis-7r99k5krn
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,251
    DavidL said:

    Cyclefree said:

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    Isn't that what leadership is - or is meant to be - about? Explaining to voters the consequences, choices and trade-offs of their votes? Not that their choice is rotten but that their choice means this and not this? Etc....

    The issue seems to me less about whether the voters made the right or wrong choice but rather that, in the time since the referendum, politicians have not set out what the choices are which now need to be made, the costs and benefits, who bears them, what trade offs there need to be, the advantages and disadvantages of both. Rather the debate has been about whether they should have voted Leave or Remain (pointless at this stage) or about insulting the other side.
    I think the problem with that is that politics doesn't work that way. It needs to be simplistic to the point of stupid.
    True but surely only because that's how we're doing it. If you had real leaders prepared to argue their case - not parrot slogans - and really listen and explain I think, naive fool though I may be, that people would be prepared to listen and respond intelligently. Not even trying to do so is taking people for fools and so they've responded by throwing a brick through the window.

    Leadership surely means taking that first step and showing that you're prepared to trust people to respond to arguments. Not "we accept the vote" said in a grudging way that suggests that you're doing anything but. Nor even the stupidity of "Brexit means Brexit" since staying in the Single Market and leaving the political side would be consistent with the referendum result. But saying that given the referendum result, these are the choices which now need to be made, these are the consequences, etc.

    Politicians have gone into a sulk, even those on the pro-Brexit side, and no-one is willing to think intelligently about what a post-Brexit Britain should be or do or how it should relate to its neighbours.

    Even if you think that leaving the EU was the wrong thing, there was an intelligent and grown up way of going about it. If you think it was the right thing to do, you can hardly be impressed by the way we have gone about it since last June. We just don't look like a serious country. We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    Tear down the EU statues, ban the flag

    https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/900619191627239424
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,926
    DavidL said:

    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
    Apparently last time it didn't work out great - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/26/what-happened-the-last-time-companies-got-a-break-on-overseas-profits.html

    Money was ploughed into share buy-backs and dividends, and many of the biggest beneficiaries cut jobs.

    "The CRS cited a series of reports into the benefits of repatriation, with a common theme that the 2004 program was "an ineffective means of increasing economic growth."

    Maybe Trump will do better, but it seems premature to assume this will get him re-elected.

    As an aside- I think the US economy is doing pretty well... yet Trump's ratings continue to decline.
    I think that is exactly why they will want to increase the conditionality but even that money must have bled into the general economy boosting demand and asset prices. The sheer scale of this means it will be QE on stilts and it should help the economy in the short term. Whether that helps Trump is of course another question.
    In practice I think conditionality will be tough to achieve.
    I'm also unconvinced that Trump/the GOP would actually want to have much conditionality...

  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,118
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    Its not just the bringing onshore of $1trn, it is the conditionality of what they do with that $1trn after paying $100bn or so of taxes. My understanding is that they will require to give undertakings to spend it in the US.

    The ideal for Trump is that it helps rebuild new industries in the rust bucket marginal states. That may well happen to some extent but the price of small internet start ups is going to soar even higher as the Tech giants buy up every bit of IP they think might ever have any potential.
    Apparently last time it didn't work out great - https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/26/what-happened-the-last-time-companies-got-a-break-on-overseas-profits.html

    Money was ploughed into share buy-backs and dividends, and many of the biggest beneficiaries cut jobs.


    Maybe Trump will do better, but it seems premature to assume this will get him re-elected.

    As an aside- I think the US economy is doing pretty well... yet Trump's ratings continue to decline.
    I think that is exactly why they will want to increase the conditionality but even that money must have bled into the general economy boosting demand and asset prices. The sheer scale of this means it will be QE on stilts and it should help the economy in the short term. Whether that helps Trump is of course another question.
    Yes, the scale of it is enormous. Assuming $2.5trn at 10% tax, that adds something like 7% to the federal income.

    The British equivalent numbers would be about £400bn brought onshore generating £40bn in tax. That’s a lot of infrastructure spending and a lot of extra money in the economy.
    Infrastructure projects typically have quite a long lead time. Seems unlikely that, assumoing the bill passes reasonably straightforwardly, any money will actually be available until 2019 a the earliest, and much, if any, earth being turned until 2020-21.
    I suspect many of Trumps supporters will want jam today, not tomorrow or next week. And tax cuts won’t affect them, unless they are on consumer items, where, IIRC, most of the tax element is levied by the States or the municipality.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:



    I think the problem with that is that politics doesn't work that way. It needs to be simplistic to the point of stupid.

    True but surely only because that's how we're doing it. If you had real leaders prepared to argue their case - not parrot slogans - and really listen and explain I think, naive fool though I may be, that people would be prepared to listen and respond intelligently. Not even trying to do so is taking people for fools and so they've responded by throwing a brick through the window.

    Leadership surely means taking that first step and showing that you're prepared to trust people to respond to arguments. Not "we accept the vote" said in a grudging way that suggests that you're doing anything but. Nor even the stupidity of "Brexit means Brexit" since staying in the Single Market and leaving the political side would be consistent with the referendum result. But saying that given the referendum result, these are the choices which now need to be made, these are the consequences, etc.

    Politicians have gone into a sulk, even those on the pro-Brexit side, and no-one is willing to think intelligently about what a post-Brexit Britain should be or do or how it should relate to its neighbours.

    Even if you think that leaving the EU was the wrong thing, there was an intelligent and grown up way of going about it. If you think it was the right thing to do, you can hardly be impressed by the way we have gone about it since last June. We just don't look like a serious country. We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.
    I've been giving further thought to this question. I don't think that there is as much room for manoeuvre as you suggest because of the way that the referendum was won, but you're certainly right that no one is seriously talking about what Britain should look like in the medium term. Remainers are still in mourning while Leavers are busily trying to extract moonbeams from cucumbers. Meanwhile the body politic is rotting.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,252

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:



    I think the problem with that is that politics doesn't work that way. It needs to be simplistic to the point of stupid.

    True but surely only because that's how we're doing it. If you had real leaders prepared to argue their case - not parrot slogans - and really listen and explain I think, naive fool though I may be, that people would be prepared to listen and respond intelligently. Not even trying to do so is taking people for fools and so they've responded by throwing a brick through the window.

    Leadership surely means taking that first step and showing that you're prepared to trust people to respond to arguments. Not "we accept the vote" said in a grudging way that suggests that you're doing anything but. Nor even the stupidity of "Brexit means Brexit" since staying in the Single Market and leaving the political side would be consistent with the referendum result. But saying that given the referendum result, these are the choices which now need to be made, these are the consequences, etc.

    Politicians have gone into a sulk, even those on the pro-Brexit side, and no-one is willing to think intelligently about what a post-Brexit Britain should be or do or how it should relate to its neighbours.

    Even if you think that leaving the EU was the wrong thing, there was an intelligent and grown up way of going about it. If you think it was the right thing to do, you can hardly be impressed by the way we have gone about it since last June. We just don't look like a serious country. We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.
    I've been giving further thought to this question. I don't think that there is as much room for manoeuvre as you suggest because of the way that the referendum was won, but you're certainly right that no one is seriously talking about what Britain should look like in the medium term. Remainers are still in mourning while Leavers are busily trying to extract moonbeams from cucumbers. Meanwhile the body politic is rotting.
    There really is only one way to make the issue 'go away' in the medium term and that is to accept that our place is in the EU and we should be at the heart of it. Only by joining the Euro can we put this episode behind us and move on.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    which doesn’t look good politically for the future.

    IF he survives this term, I very much doubt he'll run again - he'll have four years to address the many challenges faced by the 'deplorables' - and he'll fail (because very few of them have easy, if any solutions) - so he'll end up as 'another Washington politician who betrayed us' - and I don't think Trump is enjoying it much - I suspect he's finding it much harder than he anticipated....

    Judging by his Phoenix rally his base certainly don't think he has betrayed them
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    edited August 2017
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,926
    Sandpit said:

    I maintain that the key to Trump’s presidency is his bill on repatriation of overseas corporate cash. It will release several hundred billion dollars of tax revenue which he has earmarked for infrastructure spending across mainly rural America, as well as potentially a couple of trillion (with a T) dollars into the general economy. If that happens he’s probably getting re-elected.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/13/companies-have-big-plans-foroverseas-cash--if-tax-reform-ever-happens.html

    The last time the tax rate offered was 5.25% (vs. 35%) - but still less than 10% of eligible companies participated, bringing back $312bn in profits.

    Presumably to get a larger share repatriated, you need to offer a lower rate.

    The full 2.5tn at 5% would be $125bn of extra tax revenue.
    Not to be sneezed at, but as a one-off injection that would be 3% of federal budget for one year.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    Nigelb said:

    I am not quite so sanguine. What the polling says to me is that a good third of the US electorate are completely unmoored from reality.
    Yes, it's very, very likely that the Republicans will do badly in the mid term elections, and that Trump will be a one term president - if he makes it that far. But until he is actually gone I remain uneasy. There remains the outside chance that events conspire in his favour.
    A buffoon without political or moral scruple, whom a third of the country will back without hesitation, remains dangerous.

    As I said before the election and like Bill Clinton Trump will be a disaster for his own party but will likely win again himself
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,251

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:



    I think the problem with that is that politics doesn't work that way. It needs to be simplistic to the point of stupid.

    True but surely only because that's how we're doing it. If you had real leaders prepared to argue their case - not parrot slogans - and really listen and explain I think, naive fool though I may be, that people would be prepared to listen and respond intelligently. Not even trying to do so is taking people for fools and so they've responded by throwing a brick through the window.

    Leadership surely means taking that first step and showing that you're prepared to trust people to respond to arguments. Not "we accept the vote" said in a grudging way that suggests that you're doing anything but. Nor even the stupidity of "Brexit means Brexit" since staying in the Single Market and leaving the political side would be consistent with the referendum result. But saying that given the referendum result, these are the choices which now need to be made, these are the consequences, etc.

    Politicians have gone into a sulk, even those on the pro-Brexit side, and no-one is willing to think intelligently about what a post-Brexit Britain should be or do or how it should relate to its neighbours.

    Even if you think that leaving the EU was the wrong thing, there was an intelligent and grown up way of going about it. If you think it was the right thing to do, you can hardly be impressed by the way we have gone about it since last June. We just don't look like a serious country. We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.
    I've been giving further thought to this question. I don't think that there is as much room for manoeuvre as you suggest because of the way that the referendum was won, but you're certainly right that no one is seriously talking about what Britain should look like in the medium term. Remainers are still in mourning while Leavers are busily trying to extract moonbeams from cucumbers. Meanwhile the body politic is rotting.
    Leaders make - or try to make - room for manoeuvre where there appears to be none. I don't think we should be passive on the immigration question, for instance. We are entitled to go back to people and unpick their concerns and try to deal intelligently and decently with the legitimate concerns which people have about immigration and minimising the xenophobic "send everyone home" aspects which help no-one.

    But I may be suffering from naivety on this score. The attempt is surely worth doing, no?
  • Options
    GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,251
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:



    I think the problem with that is that politics doesn't work that way. It needs to be simplistic to the point of stupid.

    True but surely only because that's how we're doing it. If you had real leaders prepared to argue their case - not parrot slogans - and really listen and explain I think, naive fool though I may be, that people would be prepared to listen and respond intelligently. Not even trying to do so is taking people for fools and so they've responded by throwing a brick through the window.

    Leadership surely means taking that first step and showing that you're prepared to trust people to respond to arguments. Not "we accept the vote" said in a grudging way that suggests that you're doing anything but. Nor even the stupidity of "Brexit means Brexit" since staying in the Single Market and leaving the political side would be consistent with the referendum result. But saying that given the referendum result, these are the choices which now need to be made, these are the consequences, etc.

    Politicians have gone into a sulk, even those on the pro-Brexit side, and no-one is willing to think intelligently about what a post-Brexit Britain should be or do or how it should relate to its neighbours.

    Even if you think that leaving the EU was the wrong thing, there was an intelligent and grown up way of going about it. If you think it was the right thing to do, you can hardly be impressed by the way we have gone about it since last June. We just don't look like a serious country. We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.
    I've been giving further thought to this question. I don't think that there is as much room for manoeuvre as you suggest because of the way that the referendum was won, but you're certainly right that no one is seriously talking about what Britain should look like in the medium term. Remainers are still in mourning while Leavers are busily trying to extract moonbeams from cucumbers. Meanwhile the body politic is rotting.
    There really is only one way to make the issue 'go away' in the medium term and that is to accept that our place is in the EU and we should be at the heart of it. Only by joining the Euro can we put this episode behind us and move on.
    We will never join the Euro, Sweden, Denmark and Hungary are more likely to leave the EU than the UK join it
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,564
    HYUFD said:
    "New Labour" MP doesn't have the same meaning it once did, clearly!! :-)
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,926
    Cyclefree said:
    Really stupid.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,251
    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,252
    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Let's look at how our 'true friends' in the Commonwealth with no Remain bias see it:

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/sorry-boris-johnson-britain-has-little-to-offer-australia-20170731-gxm1di.html

    "Sorry Boris Johnson, little Britain has little to offer Australia"
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,564

    Meanwhile, the important stuff is being done in the White House:

    https://www.axios.com/the-white-house-reveals-a-renovated-west-wing-2476242788.html

    "The Oval Office refresh featured new wallpaper and a rug used by Ronald Reagan, at least until Trump designs his own floor covering, which might necessitate more new wallpaper."

    "The Obama wallpaper was very damaged. There were a lot of stains on it."

    The mind boggles......
    Coffe cups sent flying? Seems unlikely in 'no drama obama' whitehouse.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844
    HYUFD said:
    Contrast with the new Tory MP in the same article:

    Kemi has friends from across parties, and is saddened but not surprised to hear that some Labour MPs wouldn’t consider it: “They genuinely believe that we are vermin.” She goes on: “I have family members who vote Labour. If you’re in a position where all the people you know think and look like you, you have a problem.”

    http://www.refinery29.uk/2017/08/167058/female-mps-2017
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 13,377
    edited August 2017
    Back on topic......

    For months now I've been saying 'watch the popularity rating'. When all is said and done, it's this which will determine whether he goes, and when. Below 40% is dangerous, below 35% and he's probably a goner. He's just dipped a fraction below 37%, close to his all time low of 36.6% - so bad, but not necessarily terminal.

    There's a new factor though. Support for the Republicans in the race for Congress has suddenly fallen off a cliff - down from 39.1% to 36.4%. So it looks like the strategy of distancing the Party from Trump isn't working, and he's taking it down with him.

    The Republicans have an immensly strong position in Senate for the next round of voting and it would take something cataclysmic for them to lose control but if both popularity rating drop below 35%, the Party will have to do something.

    I cannot see it sleepwalking to electoral catastrophe.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,022

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Let's look at how our 'true friends' in the Commonwealth with no Remain bias see it:

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/sorry-boris-johnson-britain-has-little-to-offer-australia-20170731-gxm1di.html

    "Sorry Boris Johnson, little Britain has little to offer Australia"
    Ah well, we may as well call the whole thing off then!
  • Options
    619619 Posts: 1,784
    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval ratings are the lowest for any incumbent postwar President at this stage with onpy Bill Clinton anywhere near as bad. The fact the Democrats were crushed in the 1994 midterms and lost both chambers of Congress should give the GOP serious cause for concern next year, especially with so many saying they will vote against Congressmen who voted to repeal Obamacare and the GOP base gaving little enthusiasm for Ryan and McConnell. However Trump himself can take a little comfort from the fact that although Bill Clinton badly trailed leading 1996 GOP contenders like Bob Dole by the general election he was re elected

    Clinton isnt a maniac like Ttump though. He has his one party trick of blaming the 'fake news and real jews'. Charlottesville seems a turning point (i hope) on him
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Let's look at how our 'true friends' in the Commonwealth with no Remain bias see it:

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/sorry-boris-johnson-britain-has-little-to-offer-australia-20170731-gxm1di.html

    "Sorry Boris Johnson, little Britain has little to offer Australia"
    Comment piece from an Australian journo, like linking to the guardian.

    And nothing to do w what I posted, but good morning anyway!
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Disdain for A does not mean adulation for B. @Cyclefree is hardly a starry-eyed fan of Eurocrats (nor am I for that matter). It doesn't improve the quality of the UK's offering though.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,942
    edited August 2017



    Let's look at how our 'true friends' in the Commonwealth with no Remain bias see it:

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/sorry-boris-johnson-britain-has-little-to-offer-australia-20170731-gxm1di.html

    "Sorry Boris Johnson, little Britain has little to offer Australia"

    I read that piece a while ago and it reads like someone pretty bitter at the way the "Motherland" has treated Australia over the years... And to be fair they have some justification to be bitter at how europhile members of the UK elite and governing class like you have treated them.

    We've got a lot of making up to do... Not just to Australia but to the whole of the Commonwealth.

    However the position that we have "nothing to offer" seems at odds with the PM of Australia being the first leader on the phone after the referendum saying he wants to be the first in the queue with a trade deal...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    619 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump's approval ratings are the lowest for any incumbent postwar President at this stage with onpy Bill Clinton anywhere near as bad. The fact the Democrats were crushed in the 1994 midterms and lost both chambers of Congress should give the GOP serious cause for concern next year, especially with so many saying they will vote against Congressmen who voted to repeal Obamacare and the GOP base gaving little enthusiasm for Ryan and McConnell. However Trump himself can take a little comfort from the fact that although Bill Clinton badly trailed leading 1996 GOP contenders like Bob Dole by the general election he was re elected

    Clinton isnt a maniac like Ttump though. He has his one party trick of blaming the 'fake news and real jews'. Charlottesville seems a turning point (i hope) on him
    Clinton was seen as a left liberal in his first 2 years with things like 'don't ask don't tell' and Hillarycare and his approval ratings were almost as bad as Trump's it was only once he lost Congress he was seen as more centrist
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    edited August 2017

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Disdain for A does not mean adulation for B. @Cyclefree is hardly a starry-eyed fan of Eurocrats (nor am I for that matter). It doesn't improve the quality of the UK's offering though.
    Only ever criticising the side you disagree with gives that impression
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214
    edited August 2017

    Back on topic......

    For months now I've been saying 'watch the popularity rating'. When all is said and done, it's this which will determine whether he goes, and when. Below 40% is dangerous, below 35% and he's probably a goner. He's just dipped a fraction below 37%, close to his all time low of 36.6% - so bad, but not necessarily terminal.

    There's a new factor though. Support for the Republicans in the race for Congress has suddenly fallen off a cliff - down from 39.1% to 36.4%. So it looks like the strategy of distancing the Party from Trump isn't working, and he's taking it down with him.

    The Republicans have an immensly strong position in Senate for the next round of voting and it would take something cataclysmic for them to lose control but if both popularity rating drop below 35%, the Party will have to do something.

    I cannot see it sleepwalking to electoral catastrophe.

    Trump still has the GOP base unlike Ryan and McConnell, if they try and impeach Trump GOP incumbents would be primaried next year everywhere
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    HYUFD said:
    Contrast with the new Tory MP in the same article:

    Kemi has friends from across parties, and is saddened but not surprised to hear that some Labour MPs wouldn’t consider it: “They genuinely believe that we are vermin.” She goes on: “I have family members who vote Labour. If you’re in a position where all the people you know think and look like you, you have a problem.”

    http://www.refinery29.uk/2017/08/167058/female-mps-2017
    Yes, ridiculously partisan
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,214

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Let's look at how our 'true friends' in the Commonwealth with no Remain bias see it:

    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/sorry-boris-johnson-britain-has-little-to-offer-australia-20170731-gxm1di.html

    "Sorry Boris Johnson, little Britain has little to offer Australia"
    A comment from a left-wing Australian in a left-wing Australian newspaper says little about what the average Australian thinks. The metropolitan Sydney and Melbourne elite are mainly Republican but in 1999 Australia voted to retain the monarchy by 10%, 6% more than the UK voted for Brexit
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    All this may be worth it but there is an element of self-delusion in how we're approaching our independent life. So rubbish analogy though it may be there is, to my mind, too much of the teenager in Britain's current approach for my liking. The only way we will succeed is by behaving like a serious grown up country which has taken a serious grown up step and is getting on with it in a sober way. I look at May, Fox, Johnson and Davis and do not see people who are giving that impression to us - let alone to the outside world. I see Corbyn and McDonnell and Abbott and I see the same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Disdain for A does not mean adulation for B. @Cyclefree is hardly a starry-eyed fan of Eurocrats (nor am I for that matter). It doesn't improve the quality of the UK's offering though.
    Only ever criticising the side you disagree with gives that impression
    I could point to a fair range of thread headers where my lack of enthusiasm for Eurocrats was pretty obvious.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,519

    HYUFD said:
    Contrast with the new Tory MP in the same article:

    Kemi has friends from across parties, and is saddened but not surprised to hear that some Labour MPs wouldn’t consider it: “They genuinely believe that we are vermin.” She goes on: “I have family members who vote Labour. If you’re in a position where all the people you know think and look like you, you have a problem.”

    http://www.refinery29.uk/2017/08/167058/female-mps-2017
    Funny linked article on Jess Phillips. I know people blow hot and cold about her but she has a turn of phrase:

    "Ms Phillips added that women were “entirely missing” from Labour’s industrial strategy because it was all about “men with shovels”."
  • Options
    Charles said:

    FT: Giving up influence in Europe will not enhance the UK’s standing elsewhere

    https://www.ft.com/content/d9e595d0-8750-11e7-bf50-e1c239b45787

    The underlying problem is that most ministers know that Brexit comes with a hefty cost, but are unwilling to confront voters with the consequences of the referendum. How, they ask, can we tell the voters they made a rotten choice?

    It's like being in a convoy: you'll go faster but not get to choose the destination
    Don't convoys travel at the pace of the slowest ship?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Cyclefree said:



    I've been giving further thought to this question. I don't think that there is as much room for manoeuvre as you suggest because of the way that the referendum was won, but you're certainly right that no one is seriously talking about what Britain should look like in the medium term. Remainers are still in mourning while Leavers are busily trying to extract moonbeams from cucumbers. Meanwhile the body politic is rotting.

    Leaders make - or try to make - room for manoeuvre where there appears to be none. I don't think we should be passive on the immigration question, for instance. We are entitled to go back to people and unpick their concerns and try to deal intelligently and decently with the legitimate concerns which people have about immigration and minimising the xenophobic "send everyone home" aspects which help no-one.

    But I may be suffering from naivety on this score. The attempt is surely worth doing, no?
    This goes back to your question of the other day. Until those on the Leave side who do not wish to go down an anti-immigration route break cover and confront the referendum campaign that they themselves fought, no, the attempt is not worth doing.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TOPPING said:

    HYUFD said:
    Contrast with the new Tory MP in the same article:

    Kemi has friends from across parties, and is saddened but not surprised to hear that some Labour MPs wouldn’t consider it: “They genuinely believe that we are vermin.” She goes on: “I have family members who vote Labour. If you’re in a position where all the people you know think and look like you, you have a problem.”

    http://www.refinery29.uk/2017/08/167058/female-mps-2017
    Funny linked article on Jess Phillips. I know people blow hot and cold about her but she has a turn of phrase:

    "Ms Phillips added that women were “entirely missing” from Labour’s industrial strategy because it was all about “men with shovels”."
    Like Austin Mitchell before her, she is witty but not wise.
  • Options
    AllanAllan Posts: 262
    HYUFD said:
    Yes, she might catch good manners from them.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    edited August 2017

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Disdain for A does not mean adulation for B. @Cyclefree is hardly a starry-eyed fan of Eurocrats (nor am I for that matter). It doesn't improve the quality of the UK's offering though.
    Only ever criticising the side you disagree with gives that impression
    I could point to a fair range of thread headers where my lack of enthusiasm for Eurocrats was pretty obvious.
    Thread headers pay quick lip service to the alternative argument as per GCSE teachings, but only in a verse chorus verse traditional structure.

    In your comments you make snide jokes about Leavers on a daily basis, and twist every story to be bad for Brexit as do all the other hardcore Remainers. It's like watching a 70s racist blame the black bloke for everything that goes wrong. Telling each other how clever you all are is just a delaying mechanism for coming to terms w defeat. It's probably time to relax about it. Try Headspace
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    HYUFD said:
    Contrast with the new Tory MP in the same article:

    Kemi has friends from across parties, and is saddened but not surprised to hear that some Labour MPs wouldn’t consider it: “They genuinely believe that we are vermin.” She goes on: “I have family members who vote Labour. If you’re in a position where all the people you know think and look like you, you have a problem.”

    http://www.refinery29.uk/2017/08/167058/female-mps-2017
    Both Kemi and Laura worked for McDonald's before becoming MPs, according to that article. The McDonald's PR team should look into this -- it has done wonders for Eton.

    (I've previously recommended McDonald's to friends' children as it can provide sound training and the basis of a good career especially for non-graduates, despite the sneers it, and retail generally, often receives.)
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    OT -- doubtless old news but I see Backbite (political publisher and one of Iain Dale's day jobs) has 50 per cent off till the end of the month.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,837
    edited August 2017
    I had a (20W?) lightbulb moment reading the piece in die Welt below. It's worth persevering with Google Translate. The author asks why the government hasn't done a single thing to prepare the country for Brexit and thinks it isn't serious about Brexit. I would say more indecision than a plan but it comes to the same thing. There is plenty of argument in the UK about Brexit but very little discussion about how to achieve it.

    I realised for the first time that there is a consensus of sorts in the UK about Brexit. Both Remainers and Leavers want Brexit to change things as little as possible. In the Remainers' case it's about damage limitation. In the Leavers' case it is an expectation that nothing important will change after Brexit - the absence of a Project Fear essentially. Patrick Minford's wildly misinformed report that Britain will be £135 billion better off after Brexit is predicated on us continuing to trade on exactly the same terms after Brexit as now.

    I have always thought Leavers were making a mistake in thinking there would be no real change with Brexit but missed the much more important point that they don't actually want there to be change. They may talk, as Professor Minford does, of opportunities but virtually no-one is prepared to take responsibility for effecting change. Certainly none of the politicians are. I expect the job to end up with the civil servants who, in the absence of a steer from politicians, will aim not to rock the boat. The recent flurry of "position papers" are civil servants at their finest, articulating fluently about nothing much at all.

    For the first time I am more concerned about the EU negotiators than the UK ones. We are waiting for them to tell us what's what - we are not going to do it ourselves - and therefore rely on the kindness of those we have estranged. I hope they are tolerant of our stupidity, give us our figleaves of control - our indirect jurisdictions, our new and special relationships - and don't screw us over just because they can. The UK is worth keeping in the EU camp.

    https://twitter.com/philipoltermann/status/900305130876268545
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,027
    Mr. 43, that could be the worst of both worlds.

    One half angry we're leaving in name only, one half angry that we're leaving at all.

    Well. I suspect it'd more like a fifth either side, with three-fifths just wanting things to be ok.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,019

    HYUFD said:
    Contrast with the new Tory MP in the same article:

    Kemi has friends from across parties, and is saddened but not surprised to hear that some Labour MPs wouldn’t consider it: “They genuinely believe that we are vermin.” She goes on: “I have family members who vote Labour. If you’re in a position where all the people you know think and look like you, you have a problem.”

    http://www.refinery29.uk/2017/08/167058/female-mps-2017
    Kemi Badenoch is definitely a name to watch in the future.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,027
    F1: looked at some other bets (Hulkenberg top six at 3.5 and Raikkonen fastest lap at 7.5). The latter is particularly tempting, but decided to just stick with Raikkonen each way to 'win' qualifying at 17. That'll be my only early tip for this weekend.

    Incidentally, in the future I might start writing concise early tip posts on my blog (still mention them here, though) and other things, but that's a matter to be discussed after the Belgian Grand Prix.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:
    Of course. If you make it obvious enough that you hate foreigners, they're going to react accordingly. Fewer people are coming and more people are leaving.

    I've been predicting that for months.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,220

    isam said:
    Of course. If you make it obvious enough that you hate foreigners, they're going to react accordingly. Fewer people are coming and more people are leaving.

    I've been predicting that for months.
    It looks like net migration is levelling out at 250k.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,026

    isam said:
    Of course. If you make it obvious enough that you hate foreigners, they're going to react accordingly. Fewer people are coming and more people are leaving.

    I've been predicting that for months.
    How can we have confidence in the absolute figures though ?
    Do we have any exit checks in place yet ? Keeping an accurate tab on migration numbers is important in my opinion whether you're in favour of more migration or not.

    Apparently the government had simply assumed students overstayed here but apparently they may not be doing so.
    I'd have thought it might be a rather good idea to check so we can make correct service provision for hospitals etc...
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,118
    isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Cyclefree said:

    GeoffM said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ...We're like a teenager who leaves home without a job or money and then sits in the street outside wailing rather than actually getting on with their independent life, hard as it may be.

    How? We haven't left yet - there's a two year wait in the hallway whilst the rest of the world is shouting through the letterbox with new opportunities. We've already got a job and skills that others want. We're currently paying rent for our bedroom so soon we're about to have more disposable income to spend elsewhere. We've 582 days 3 hours and 18 minutes away from getting on with our independent life.

    Sheesh, your analogy was terrible. It was painful trying to work with it.
    Fair enough. It's early.

    But the rest of the world is not really shouting at us with new opportunities. They see a country which will be a supplicant. So yes we might get some deals but they will come at a price and we will be the weaker party. We will no longer be the entry point for the rest of the Single Market so our existing skills / job are less attractive. We will have to pay back the money we owe so will have less to spend - at least in the short-term - and we seem currently to be asking our existing family to give us all sorts of things which are incompatible with really being independent.

    same, only wearing Che Guevara T-shirts.
    https://twitter.com/samuelcoates/status/899900438459420673
    Disdain for A does not mean adulation for B. @Cyclefree is hardly a starry-eyed fan of Eurocrats (nor am I for that matter). It doesn't improve the quality of the UK's offering though.
    Only ever criticising the side you disagree with gives that impression
    I could point to a fair range of thread headers where my lack of enthusiasm for Eurocrats was pretty obvious.
    Thread headers pay quick lip service to the alternative argument as per GCSE teachings, but only in a verse chorus verse traditional structure.

    In your comments you make snide jokes about Leavers on a daily basis, and twist every story to be bad for Brexit as do all the other hardcore Remainers. It's like watching a 70s racist blame the black bloke for everything that goes wrong. Telling each other how clever you all are is just a delaying mechanism for coming to terms w defeat. It's probably time to relax about it. Try Headspace
    What will you do Mr I, if at the end of the day the Government throws up it’s hands and says it’s just too difficult.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,844

    isam said:
    Fewer people are coming and more people are leaving.

    I've been predicting that for months.
    Er......more people are still coming than leaving....we've added a city the size of Brighton in the past year....
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,837

    Mr. 43, that could be the worst of both worlds.

    One half angry we're leaving in name only, one half angry that we're leaving at all.

    Well. I suspect it'd more like a fifth either side, with three-fifths just wanting things to be ok.

    I don't think it will be Leave in Name Only. For a start the EU has no interest in replicating its system for us. But we will want to work with the EU system rather than against it and we won't be controlling that change because no-one wants to do it.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,043
    edited August 2017

    isam said:
    Of course. If you make it obvious enough that you hate foreigners, they're going to react accordingly. Fewer people are coming and more people are leaving.

    I've been predicting that for months.
    I don't know, four years ago we had billboard vans telling people to fuck off and the numbers still went up

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24624383
This discussion has been closed.