Trump has got to be the worst President for at least generations - I assume somewhere in the past there will be someone worse.
What makes me laugh is that for all that Trump is a preening self-obsessed paranoid liar, enough voters saw him as the least worst option vs Hillary Clinton. Which is somewhat damning of her...
Nixon. Although he's less competent than Nixon.
Nixon proposed, effectively, the healthcate plan Obamacare is and, amazingly, a universal basic income.
Both torpedoed by the Dems at the time for not going far enough.
More would be achieved by politicians in Western countries, if they were prepared to put aside partisan opposition to policies and recognise that it’s okay to support a move in the right direction sometimes, even if they don’t agree completely with all the details.
Listening to R4 on the morning commute, Liz Kendall's contribution to the house on social care is the sort of positive collaborative sentiment to a tough problem we could do with alot more of.
Sounds interesting, will try and listen to it later. I quite like Liz, she’s usually one to research an issue and take advise before opening her mouth.
Reading through Kendall’s speech, and skimming through a number of others, this sounds like a very sensible debate with lots of good ideas on all sides. Hopefully a cross party consensus can be arranged on this most difficult of subjects.
Yet what did the media report on yesterday in Parliament, of course it was the rowdy bear pit of PMQs with everyone insulting each other. Good to see R4 pick up on this, it’s a shame most of the rest of the media don’t follow suit.
Trump has got to be the worst President for at least generations - I assume somewhere in the past there will be someone worse.
What makes me laugh is that for all that Trump is a preening self-obsessed paranoid liar, enough voters saw him as the least worst option vs Hillary Clinton. Which is somewhat damning of her...
Did they see him as the least worst option or are they believers? For some months now I have been following the twitter feeds that Plato links to. It is very scary. These people appear brainwashed. Conspiracies abound. The question is are these people a small minority or are these thoughts widespread amongst Trump supporters.
There are quite a few true believers but not huge numbers - it's about the 30% of the GOP primary base he had in July 2015 - Janurary 2016 (i.e. before he started picking up second- and third- preference transfers). The rest of his vote were party loyalists and negative votes.
Thanks David. Where do you get the number from? Is this from the primaries and is that what you are referring to when you say second and third preference transfers?
Yes. I've not checked recent detailed polling but I'd work on the basis that his primary base is a pretty good approximation of his genuine positive support. he does poll better than that on approval ratings but again, he'll always get quite a bit of benefit of the doubt support there from GOP-identifiers and others who may disapprove of certain actions but like the style.
This isn't good for us. A weak Merkel will find it much more difficult to reach a Brexit settlement that is in the interests of Germany and the UK.
I didnt say it was, I am simply looking at events in Germany and see a lot of parallels between TMay and TMerkel, both are in trouble
Merkel will of course eventually form a govt, but she is a much weakened Kanzlerin
The big difference is that the German Chancellor is a lot more competent than the British Prime Minister
Really?
She screwed up on air pollution, nuclear energy, migration, Greece and lied about her banks.
In your opinion. Not, apparently, in the opinion of the majority of Germans.
She’s was not voted for by the majority of Germans. Of course she doesn’t need to be, it’s a different system and you need even less of a majority vote to become PM/Chancellor, so the two situations are not comparable, and she is or at least was more competent given she is a long standing leader not someone hanging on by a thread after a year, but that doesn’t mean she cannot have started to screw up more than she used to, and her past or even present competence doesn’t magically make her supported by a majority in electoral terms. At best most will be satisfied with her performance.
Or in short, most may well be satisfied, and her record is one of greater competence, but that doesn’t mean she may not also be messing up more now, and be less popular now.
Really this is just a variant on the May/Corbyn winning the election argument. May clearly went backwards so claiming a win would feel wrong, but she did still end up as PM and led the most popular party in the country. Corbyn clearly made gains and has the momentum now, but his party was still behind so any claim he won also feels wrong. Merkel is strongest, clearly, but no longer as strong as she was, and presumably that is down in part to her being competent, but no longer as competent as she was.
That's fair comment, but Merkel is still highly rated by Germans. In this recent poll, 63% of Germans said they were satisfied or very satisfied with her performance, second only to Wolfgang Schäuble. I doubt very much that May would get such ratings.
And in case your maths is as bad as your belief in democracy, 61% of 48% is still less than 30% of those who voted in the referendum.
It matters because we might well be in an implementation transition period at the time of the next election and we really have no idea what Lab's view on the EU will be at that time. Or now, for that matter, but that's fine because it's their job to oppose atm.
I'm expecting lots of Kadets and Black Hundreds...
That's great. I turn out to be a "Centre Social Revolutionary, leaning Bolshevik", which sounds spot on.
Menshevik Internationalist. Should I head for Peria now and see if I can get to the West?
At +5,-1 I suspect I'd be lucky to get a named mass grave.
So authoritarian. I was +5, -2.
Hopefully I'll survive long enough to read an apologia for your execution.
I was thinking perhaps you could form the right wing of David's new party. Not sure that restricting membership to Davids is terribly practical although it is a good start. 2 of my best friends are also called David.
Would changing my name to David count as entryism?
I was going to say you'd better ask David but that wouldn't be much of a clue would it? Bit like asking for Spartacus in a Roman slave revolt.
This isn't good for us. A weak Merkel will find it much more difficult to reach a Brexit settlement that is in the interests of Germany and the UK.
I didnt say it was, I am simply looking at events in Germany and see a lot of parallels between TMay and TMerkel, both are in trouble
Merkel will of course eventually form a govt, but she is a much weakened Kanzlerin
The big difference is that the German Chancellor is a lot more competent than the British Prime Minister
Really?
She screwed up on air pollution, nuclear energy, migration, Greece and lied about her banks.
In your opinion. Not, apparently, in the opinion of the majority of Germans.
She’s was not voted for by the majority of Germans. Of course she doesn’t need to be, it’s a different system and you need even less of a majority vote to become PM/Chancellor, so the two situations are not comparable, and she is or at least was more competent given she is a long standing leader not someone hanging on by a thread after a year, but that doesn’t mean she cannot have started to screw up more than she used to, and her past or even present competence doesn’t magically make her supported by a majority in electoral terms. At best most will be satisfied with her performance.
Or in short, most may well be satisfied, and her record is one of greater competence, but that doesn’t mean she may not also be messing up more now, and be less popular now.
Really this is just a variant on the May/Corbyn winning the election argument. May clearly went backwards so claiming a win would feel wrong, but she did still end up as PM and led the most popular party in the country. Corbyn clearly made gains and has the momentum now, but his party was still behind so any claim he won also feels wrong. Merkel is strongest, clearly, but no longer as strong as she was, and presumably that is down in part to her being competent, but no longer as competent as she was.
That's fair comment, but Merkel is still highly rated by Germans. In this recent poll, 63% of Germans said they were satisfied or very satisfied with her performance, second only to Wolfgang Schäuble. I doubt very much that May would get such ratings.
And in case your maths is as bad as your belief in democracy, 61% of 48% is still less than 30% of those who voted in the referendum.
It matters because we might well be in an implementation transition period at the time of the next election and we really have no idea what Lab's view on the EU will be at that time. Or now, for that matter, but that's fine because it's their job to oppose atm.
Unless there is a specific agreement from all 27 EU states plus a request from the UK we are leaving in March 2019. It doesn't matter whether there is then a transition period, we will already have left and would have to go through the whole accession process again.
So unless you think you can stop Brexit in the next 17 1/2 months it doesn't matter what the Remainers or Labour want. We will already have left before the next GE.
If Theresa May wants to be a success as PM and of Brexit, she needs to sack David Davis.
I nominate Michael Gove as his replacement.
I am a Michael Gove fan. He is a proper libertarian (his set to with that prat Leveson almost made that farce worthwhile), he is a clear thinker, he has an excellent wit which can deflate pomposity well and he has no problem at all with taking on vested interests. But if he were our negotiator the range of possible options may have to include fairly major warfare, possibly nuclear.
And in case your maths is as bad as your belief in democracy, 61% of 48% is still less than 30% of those who voted in the referendum.
It matters because we might well be in an implementation transition period at the time of the next election and we really have no idea what Lab's view on the EU will be at that time. Or now, for that matter, but that's fine because it's their job to oppose atm.
Unless there is a specific agreement from all 27 EU states plus a request from the UK we are leaving in March 2019. It doesn't matter whether there is then a transition period, we will already have left and would have to go through the whole accession process again.
So unless you think you can stop Brexit in the next 17 1/2 months it doesn't matter what the Remainers or Labour want. We will already have left before the next GE.
Indeed we will have but there may be a big groundswell of opinion for a synthetic Norway-style arrangement whereby we submit ourselves to the transition period in perpetuity. Lab needs to know the current mood so that it can gauge its approach appropriately.
Trump has got to be the worst President for at least generations - I assume somewhere in the past there will be someone worse.
What makes me laugh is that for all that Trump is a preening self-obsessed paranoid liar, enough voters saw him as the least worst option vs Hillary Clinton. Which is somewhat damning of her...
Did they see him as the least worst option or are they believers? For some months now I have been following the twitter feeds that Plato links to. It is very scary. These people appear brainwashed. Conspiracies abound. The question is are these people a small minority or are these thoughts widespread amongst Trump supporters.
There are quite a few true believers but not huge numbers - it's about the 30% of the GOP primary base he had in July 2015 - Janurary 2016 (i.e. before he started picking up second- and third- preference transfers). The rest of his vote were party loyalists and negative votes.
Thanks David. Where do you get the number from? Is this from the primaries and is that what you are referring to when you say second and third preference transfers?
Yes. I've not checked recent detailed polling but I'd work on the basis that his primary base is a pretty good approximation of his genuine positive support. he does poll better than that on approval ratings but again, he'll always get quite a bit of benefit of the doubt support there from GOP-identifiers and others who may disapprove of certain actions but like the style.
And in case your maths is as bad as your belief in democracy, 61% of 48% is still less than 30% of those who voted in the referendum.
It matters because we might well be in an implementation transition period at the time of the next election and we really have no idea what Lab's view on the EU will be at that time. Or now, for that matter, but that's fine because it's their job to oppose atm.
Unless there is a specific agreement from all 27 EU states plus a request from the UK we are leaving in March 2019. It doesn't matter whether there is then a transition period, we will already have left and would have to go through the whole accession process again.
So unless you think you can stop Brexit in the next 17 1/2 months it doesn't matter what the Remainers or Labour want. We will already have left before the next GE.
Indeed we will have but there may be a big groundswell of opinion for a synthetic Norway-style arrangement whereby we submit ourselves to the transition period in perpetuity. Lab needs to know the current mood so that it can gauge its approach appropriately.
Yes, I'd have thought that an indefinite transition period would be the way to do that. Step 1 to extend it beyond the next election - keeps Brexit in play as a General Election issue.
I'm one of those who has gone from "Soft Brexit" -> "Stay In" in the past months, as I've lost faith in the Government to act on behalf of the whole country. Indeed they seem tone-deaf to even understanding the opposition let alone act on concerns. I've also lost confidence in their ability to deliver any outcome in the national interest. I'm clearly not alone!
Labour party chair Ian Lavery could face a fresh investigation into his conduct amid claims he failed to reveal a conflict of interest around owning prize-winning greyhounds.
It is alleged the Labour MP owned two racing greyhounds called Blue Artisan and Tudor Prince, but failed to declare them when he took over as chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Greyhounds.
MPs must register their financial interests before speaking on an issue in Parliament or face breaching the House of Commons’ strict code of conduct.
Greg Stone, deputy chair of the North East Lib Dems, has written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards calling for an inquiry.
Mr. tpfkar, I think most people are less than taken with the Government. However, the EU and our relationship to it is not a short term issue. If we remain, that'll have long term ramifications. If you genuinely believe that's in our interest, then fair enough (though I disagree). But I'd urge people to consider the long term over the short term when thinking about the EU and UK.
Mr. tpfkar, I think most people are less than taken with the Government. However, the EU and our relationship to it is not a short term issue. If we remain, that'll have long term ramifications. If you genuinely believe that's in our interest, then fair enough (though I disagree). But I'd urge people to consider the long term over the short term when thinking about the EU and UK.
= I don't agree with you. I'm sure Morris everyone gives exactly the appropriate amount of consideration to these issues.
And in case your maths is as bad as your belief in democracy, 61% of 48% is still less than 30% of those who voted in the referendum.
Those of us reading a political betting and polling website care.
If you don't, then take your scared, bad-winner, aggressive, nervous that Brexit may not happen, snide comments elsewhere and leave the grown-up conversation to the adults.
Labour party chair Ian Lavery could face a fresh investigation into his conduct amid claims he failed to reveal a conflict of interest around owning prize-winning greyhounds.
It is alleged the Labour MP owned two racing greyhounds called Blue Artisan and Tudor Prince, but failed to declare them when he took over as chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Greyhounds.
MPs must register their financial interests before speaking on an issue in Parliament or face breaching the House of Commons’ strict code of conduct.
Greg Stone, deputy chair of the North East Lib Dems, has written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards calling for an inquiry.
Another day, another David Davis bombshell, glad someone's picked it up.
Theresa May was put on the spot today after David Davis suggested she had not bothered to read the “excruciating detail” of secret Whitehall studies into the impact of Brexit.
Are Labour voters anti-democratic because they want to throw the democratically-elected Conservatives out of office?
They would be if they wanted to throw them out before they'd had chance to govern.
I'm sure that's exactly what they want to do. They wanted to do it on Friday morning, 9th June.
Yes, but then given that the Tories didn't have a majority, that was fair enough. Governments rely on the confidence of parliament. If you don't have 326 MPs (less adjustments for abstentions), you're fair game.
Another day, another David Davis bombshell, glad someone's picked it up.
Theresa May was put on the spot today after David Davis suggested she had not bothered to read the “excruciating detail” of secret Whitehall studies into the impact of Brexit.
If I had paid money to see this at the Trafalgar Studios I would think I was getting great value for money. That these people are actually governing us is beyond worrying.
Mr. tpfkar, I think most people are less than taken with the Government. However, the EU and our relationship to it is not a short term issue. If we remain, that'll have long term ramifications. If you genuinely believe that's in our interest, then fair enough (though I disagree). But I'd urge people to consider the long term over the short term when thinking about the EU and UK.
Yes, we simply disagree on the core issue & national interest - but I wish everyone on the other side was as civil and courteous as you are. Our national conversation would be in a far healthier state if so.
One thought about the long term though: with all these pesky lefty academics indoctrinating our yoof, it's more than possible that in 10-15 years there will be a clear Remain majority, and a serious campaign to rejoin if there's been a hard Brexit and the EU has proven resilient. That would probably on much worse terms than now (not joing the Euro but forget the rebate) and if you think that is inevitable / likely, then you could argue that a hard Brexit now is not serving our long term interests?
If Theresa May wants to be a success as PM and of Brexit, she needs to sack David Davis.
I nominate Michael Gove as his replacement.
I am a Michael Gove fan. He is a proper libertarian (his set to with that prat Leveson almost made that farce worthwhile), he is a clear thinker, he has an excellent wit which can deflate pomposity well and he has no problem at all with taking on vested interests. But if he were our negotiator the range of possible options may have to include fairly major warfare, possibly nuclear.
Despite being a lefty - I have a soft spot for Michael Gove. I think appointing him would be a clear sign of the end of 'cake and eat it' negotiation.
He wouldn't declare war - but definitely possible, perhaps likely, he would abandon negotiations and take us out of the EU before March 2019.
Labour party chair Ian Lavery could face a fresh investigation into his conduct amid claims he failed to reveal a conflict of interest around owning prize-winning greyhounds.
It is alleged the Labour MP owned two racing greyhounds called Blue Artisan and Tudor Prince, but failed to declare them when he took over as chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Greyhounds.
MPs must register their financial interests before speaking on an issue in Parliament or face breaching the House of Commons’ strict code of conduct.
Greg Stone, deputy chair of the North East Lib Dems, has written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards calling for an inquiry.
Another day, another David Davis bombshell, glad someone's picked it up.
Theresa May was put on the spot today after David Davis suggested she had not bothered to read the “excruciating detail” of secret Whitehall studies into the impact of Brexit.
It's fairly obvious though that TM isn't digging into the annexes of what I imagine are fairly turgid reports and making sure she is absolutely up to speed on what assumptions the trade gravity models use etc.
If Theresa May wants to be a success as PM and of Brexit, she needs to sack David Davis.
I nominate Michael Gove as his replacement.
I am a Michael Gove fan. He is a proper libertarian (his set to with that prat Leveson almost made that farce worthwhile), he is a clear thinker, he has an excellent wit which can deflate pomposity well and he has no problem at all with taking on vested interests. But if he were our negotiator the range of possible options may have to include fairly major warfare, possibly nuclear.
Despite being a lefty - I have a soft spot for Michael Gove. I think appointing him would be a clear sign of the end of 'cake and eat it' negotiation.
He wouldn't declare war - but definitely possible, perhaps likely, he would abandon negotiations and take us out of the EU before March 2019.
He has a rare talent for getting some peoples' backs up. Teachers come to mind, even if there was a lot of initial support for many of his ideas. I am also not sure that abandoning the negotiations is the way forward, albeit being credible about the possibility may well be the best prospect of progress.
Mr. Tpfkar, thanks. The polarisation of politics with minority but noisy idiots on the far sides is not a healthy state of affairs.
Your hypothetical prediction is a good argument for preferring to remain as we are, if you believe it will happen (should we leave). However, I think it's likelier we will either leave now and diverge and stay out, or we will end up remaining (the end of the transition, if there is one, being the tipping point).
If Theresa May wants to be a success as PM and of Brexit, she needs to sack David Davis.
I nominate Michael Gove as his replacement.
Why? What difference would Gove make? We would still have to pay £50 billion+ to the EU to get talks started on a FTA and accept free movement and ECJ jurisdiction throughout a transition period for 2 years or until a FTA was agreed. Given Davis or Boris are her likely successors sacking either could also trigger a no confidence vote.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
Another day, another David Davis bombshell, glad someone's picked it up.
Theresa May was put on the spot today after David Davis suggested she had not bothered to read the “excruciating detail” of secret Whitehall studies into the impact of Brexit.
If I had paid money to see this at the Trafalgar Studios I would think I was getting great value for money. That these people are actually governing us is beyond worrying.
In the long run we might make a tidy profit from royalties for Brexit related entertainment products.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
If Theresa May wants to be a success as PM and of Brexit, she needs to sack David Davis.
I nominate Michael Gove as his replacement.
I am a Michael Gove fan. He is a proper libertarian (his set to with that prat Leveson almost made that farce worthwhile), he is a clear thinker, he has an excellent wit which can deflate pomposity well and he has no problem at all with taking on vested interests. But if he were our negotiator the range of possible options may have to include fairly major warfare, possibly nuclear.
Despite being a lefty - I have a soft spot for Michael Gove. I think appointing him would be a clear sign of the end of 'cake and eat it' negotiation.
He wouldn't declare war - but definitely possible, perhaps likely, he would abandon negotiations and take us out of the EU before March 2019.
He has a rare talent for getting some peoples' backs up. Teachers come to mind, even if there was a lot of initial support for many of his ideas. I am also not sure that abandoning the negotiations is the way forward, albeit being credible about the possibility may well be the best prospect of progress.
I'm not sure the talent is all that rare... what is rare perhaps is he sometimes seems to manage it almost unintentionally, and then struggles to get a hearing afterwards.
Legal friends tell me he did well at justice - particularly since he followed Grayling. At education he obviously made some very bad mistakes (and was far too bone headed to admit them), but at the same time some of his reforms I think will bear fruit.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
On the white point: false stories would be less likely to be taken seriously if we hadn't had MPs criticise a judge's appointment in part because he was white and if widespread child rape allegations hadn't been ignored because the victims were WWC and the police didn't want to appear 'culturally insensitive'.
For that matter, Tim Hunt [think I got the name right] was hounded out of his university position for making a joke people didn't like. Or there being too many whites in the FA/Bank of England/BBC.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit backers (about 28% of Remainers ie about 12% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 64% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit (about 35% of Remainers ie about 18% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 70% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
We might accept it, but we don’t like it, fear for our country and our children’s opportunities if/when it happens, and will work to reverse it at the first opportunity!
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit backers (about 28% of Remainers ie about 12% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 64% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
That's a tenuous calculation, but the same number in June would have been 76%.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
On the white point: false stories would be less likely to be taken seriously if we hadn't had MPs criticise a judge's appointment in part because he was white and if widespread child rape allegations hadn't been ignored because the victims were WWC and the police didn't want to appear 'culturally insensitive'.
For that matter, Tim Hunt [think I got the name right] was hounded out of his university position for making a joke people didn't like. Or there being too many whites in the FA/Bank of England/BBC.
I think you have it wrong - students grow up to be old people who then moan about students. Students moan about the man or the government or their parents perhaps. But old people in general o rather think they ignore.
On the second point - there’s not much point discussing.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
I actually think the correction makes it look worse. A recommendation sounds stronger than a proposal.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
I regret to inform you that after careful consideration Paddy Power will not price up your suggestions on what Jared O'Mara might have said in the past about Nelson Mandela.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit backers (about 28% of Remainers ie about 12% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 64% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
I think I would say continue with Brexit for now. I voted and accept the decision. To that extent I am a Brexit backer.
But given the option of voting to abandon Brexit I might well do that because I still think it is a bad idea.
Its a meaningless survey. The fact that people accept the decision doesn't mean they back Brexit at any cost.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
Actually I'm wondering if you can read.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
But when will that consensus arrive? Moreso when many of the public are protected from the consequences of their decision. Their pensions will not fall as a result of it.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit (about 35% of Remainers ie about 18% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 70% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
We might accept it, but we don’t like it, fear for our country and our children’s opportunities if/when it happens, and will work to reverse it at the first opportunity!
No you won't as if you want to reverse it you would be in the 36% of diehard Remainers who want to reverse it or have a second referendum.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
Actually I'm wondering if you can read.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
As per the Telegraph, the number of male/white authors remains the same, they just want more non white/male authors added to the list.
So theoretically there might be 40 white authors on the list now, there'll be 40 white authors on the list going forward, just more BME authors as well as per their suggestions.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit backers (about 28% of Remainers ie about 12% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 64% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
I think I would say continue with Brexit for now. I voted and accept the decision. To that extent I am a Brexit backer.
But given the option of voting to abandon Brexit I might well do that because I still think it is a bad idea.
Its a meaningless survey. The fact that people accept the decision doesn't mean they back Brexit at any cost.
It does unless they back a second referendum or want to reverse it.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
Actually I'm wondering if you can read.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
As per the Telegraph, the number of male/white authors remains the same, they just want more non white/male authors added to the list.
So theoretically there might be 40 white authors on the list now, there'll be 40 white authors on the list going forward, just more BME authors as well as per their suggestions.
Reading lists can become stagnant. I’d be more interested in hearing which authors and works they think are appropriate.
I regret to inform you that after careful consideration Paddy Power will not price up your suggestions on what Jared O'Mara might have said in the past about Nelson Mandela.
That's a pity.
Perhaps they'll give odds on his singing anti-Semitic songs when Spurs are playing, or making monkey noises when black players touch the ball.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
Actually I'm wondering if you can read.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
As per the Telegraph, the number of male/white authors remains the same, they just want more non white/male authors added to the list.
So theoretically there might be 40 white authors on the list now, there'll be 40 white authors on the list going forward, just more BME authors as well as per their suggestions.
If you remove an approach that has enabled white male authors to get on the list then you're going to end up with less of them.
Similarly if you have a finite number of authors you can study on a course and shoehorn new ones in then you're going to have less of the original ones.
But if you really want to ignore this then I'm sure we can agree at least that the amount of time a course spends on these authors is going to be reduced based purely on them being white and more favoured races chosen instead.
So yes I'm going to stick with my initial reaction to this campaign and its aims.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit (about 35% of Remainers ie about 18% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 70% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
We might accept it, but we don’t like it, fear for our country and our children’s opportunities if/when it happens, and will work to reverse it at the first opportunity!
No you won't as if you want to reverse it you would be in the 36% of diehard Remainers who want to reverse it or have a second referendum.
I’ve always said I want a second referendum, when there’s some clearer idea of what the future will look like. I don’t want to ignore the 2016 one.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
Brexiteers need to be made to eat their own dog food for a while first, but the time will come when they can no longer mask the taste.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit (about 35% of Remainers ie about 18% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 70% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
We might accept it, but we don’t like it, fear for our country and our children’s opportunities if/when it happens, and will work to reverse it at the first opportunity!
No you won't as if you want to reverse it you would be in the 36% of diehard Remainers who want to reverse it or have a second referendum.
I’ve always said I want a second referendum, when there’s some clearer idea of what the future will look like. I don’t want to ignore the 2016 one.
So you are really in the 36% then and not the 64%.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
I am not saying what you suggest that I am saying.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
Apologies for barging into your discussion here, but...
I regret to inform you that after careful consideration Paddy Power will not price up your suggestions on what Jared O'Mara might have said in the past about Nelson Mandela.
That's a pity.
Perhaps they'll give odds on his singing anti-Semitic songs when Spurs are playing, or making monkey noises when black players touch the ball.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
I am not saying what you suggest that I am saying.
Yes you are, either you campaign to reverse it or you don't.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
Actually I'm wondering if you can read.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
As per the Telegraph, the number of male/white authors remains the same, they just want more non white/male authors added to the list.
So theoretically there might be 40 white authors on the list now, there'll be 40 white authors on the list going forward, just more BME authors as well as per their suggestions.
If you remove an approach that has enabled white male authors to get on the list then you're going to end up with less of them.
Similarly if you have a finite number of authors you can study on a course and shoehorn new ones in then you're going to have less of the original ones.
But if you really want to ignore this then I'm sure we can agree at least that the amount of time a course spends on these authors is going to be reduced based purely on them being white and more favoured races chosen instead.
So yes I'm going to stick with my initial reaction to this campaign and its aims.
Even after the Telegraph admitted it was bollocks?
You’re such a snowflake, looking for offence and outrage when non exists.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
Apologies for barging into your discussion here, but...
Reading through Kendall’s speech, and skimming through a number of others, this sounds like a very sensible debate with lots of good ideas on all sides. Hopefully a cross party consensus can be arranged on this most difficult of subjects.
Yet what did the media report on yesterday in Parliament, of course it was the rowdy bear pit of PMQs with everyone insulting each other. Good to see R4 pick up on this, it’s a shame most of the rest of the media don’t follow suit.
Yes, familiar story. The vast majority of Commons debates are sensible, sober stuff with the occasional mild wit. Consequently, they go almost entirely unreported. PMQs is a bear garden. Consequently, it gets widely reported, and people think that's typical of Parliament.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
As a Remainer (and who campaigned for it in 1975) I want to stay, but, recognising the political realities I’m somewhere between seeking a softer Brexit and a second referendum.
Add together soft Brexit and as now Brexit (about 35% of Remainers ie about 18% of the EU referendum voters) to the 52% who voted Leave and you get 70% of EU referendum voters now accepting Brexit.
We might accept it, but we don’t like it, fear for our country and our children’s opportunities if/when it happens, and will work to reverse it at the first opportunity!
No you won't as if you want to reverse it you would be in the 36% of diehard Remainers who want to reverse it or have a second referendum.
I’ve always said I want a second referendum, when there’s some clearer idea of what the future will look like. I don’t want to ignore the 2016 one.
I want a first referendum, once we know what we are talking about. The so-called first one was a complete waste of time, brought about by a waste of space.
I want a first referendum, once we know what we are talking about. The so-called first one was a complete waste of time, brought about by a waste of space.
If you go back and watch any of the 2016 referendum debates it's shocking how it seems like a different world. The country is losing its innocence over the real issues at stake regarding our membership of the EU.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
Brexiteers need to be made to eat their own dog food for a while first, but the time will come when they can no longer mask the taste.
There are more quality restrictions of manufacture of dog food (which is 80% vegetal protein anyway) than on human food processing
"For Mr Trump’s attacks on the swamp, the establishment and elitism, his Twitter wars with critics, are not a strategy designed to advance his objectives. It is the objective."
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
I am not saying what you suggest that I am saying.
Yes you are, either you campaign to reverse it or you don't.
You're missing the significance of the word "yet".
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
Brexiteers need to be made to eat their own dog food for a while first, but the time will come when they can no longer mask the taste.
There are more quality restrictions of manufacture of dog food (which is 80% vegetal protein anyway) than on human food processing
Let them eat dog food effectively says a Leaver.
You are Marie Antoinette and I claim my five Francs.
I just think the politics make it impossible. Ain't gonna happen. No major party will support it (unless Brexit sends the economy very very clearly and quickly down the khazi, which does not seem likely, now).
I think there is an element of self-correction going on there.
The more likely Brexit looks, the greater the economic harm, which makes retreating from Brexit more likely
Nissan agreed to stay in the UK when the government assured them no change. Now change is more likely, Toyota are making noises again.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
I am not saying what you suggest that I am saying.
Yes you are, either you campaign to reverse it or you don't.
You're missing the significance of the word "yet".
So you are expecting the 52% of Leave voters to fall into the Remain camp without lifting a finger, much as you barely lifted a finger to campaign for Remain in the EU referendum then?
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
Apologies for barging into your discussion here, but...
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Can't you read?
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
Actually I'm wondering if you can read.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
As per the Telegraph, the number of male/white authors remains the same, they just want more non white/male authors added to the list.
So theoretically there might be 40 white authors on the list now, there'll be 40 white authors on the list going forward, just more BME authors as well as per their suggestions.
If you remove an approach that has enabled white male authors to get on the list then you're going to end up with less of them.
Similarly if you have a finite number of authors you can study on a course and shoehorn new ones in then you're going to have less of the original ones.
But if you really want to ignore this then I'm sure we can agree at least that the amount of time a course spends on these authors is going to be reduced based purely on them being white and more favoured races chosen instead.
So yes I'm going to stick with my initial reaction to this campaign and its aims.
Even after the Telegraph admitted it was bollocks?
You’re such a snowflake, looking for offence and outrage when non exists.
Sorry if this post has invaded your safe space.
Ha ha you are physically unable to admit when you've made a mistake.
You only read the Twitter comment and hadn't read the open letter and now I've pointed out what it actually said you've gone into defensive ad-hom mode.
So less than a third of even Remainers want to reverse Brexit, another third want a second referendum and over 10% want to continue with Brexit as now.
If you consider that I'm one of the 13% who think that Brexit should continue as now, I wouldn't be interpreting these results as showing much equanimity acquiescing with the Leave vote among Remain supporters.
If you want to continue with Brexit as now fine, you accept the result and leave it at that.
You accept you lost.
The people have spoken. The Leave path needs to be followed until that is blindingly obvious to a public consensus. At the end of it all, the country will be far weaker, meaner and divided than it needed to be. It's a complete disaster.
So you still accept it then.
No, I simply think that the time has not yet been reached where the other options offered are appropriate.
So you still accept it then and will not try and reverse it
I am not saying what you suggest that I am saying.
Yes you are, either you campaign to reverse it or you don't.
You're missing the significance of the word "yet".
So you are expecting the 52% of Leave voters to fall into the Remain camp without lifting a finger, much as you barely lifted a finger to campaign for Remain in the EU referendum then?
I'm not sure what sort of campaign you expect a nobody off the internet to launch. But no, that's not what I'm expecting.
Comments
Yet what did the media report on yesterday in Parliament, of course it was the rowdy bear pit of PMQs with everyone insulting each other. Good to see R4 pick up on this, it’s a shame most of the rest of the media don’t follow suit.
implementationtransition period at the time of the next election and we really have no idea what Lab's view on the EU will be at that time. Or now, for that matter, but that's fine because it's their job to oppose atm.So unless you think you can stop Brexit in the next 17 1/2 months it doesn't matter what the Remainers or Labour want. We will already have left before the next GE.
Gove
Gove on your side
It's very lazy to argue that a particular group owes you their support.
I'm one of those who has gone from "Soft Brexit" -> "Stay In" in the past months, as I've lost faith in the Government to act on behalf of the whole country. Indeed they seem tone-deaf to even understanding the opposition let alone act on concerns. I've also lost confidence in their ability to deliver any outcome in the national interest. I'm clearly not alone!
It is alleged the Labour MP owned two racing greyhounds called Blue Artisan and Tudor Prince, but failed to declare them when he took over as chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Greyhounds.
MPs must register their financial interests before speaking on an issue in Parliament or face breaching the House of Commons’ strict code of conduct.
Greg Stone, deputy chair of the North East Lib Dems, has written to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards calling for an inquiry.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/racing-greyhound-lavery_uk_59e9d9e8e4b0f9d35bc9ede5
https://twitter.com/catalannews/status/923495884675010561
https://twitter.com/catalannews/status/923499231708635136
If you don't, then take your scared, bad-winner, aggressive, nervous that Brexit may not happen, snide comments elsewhere and leave the grown-up conversation to the adults.
Theresa May was put on the spot today after David Davis suggested she had not bothered to read the “excruciating detail” of secret Whitehall studies into the impact of Brexit.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-does-not-know-how-brexit-will-hit-economy-david-davis-says-a3668491.html
One thought about the long term though: with all these pesky lefty academics indoctrinating our yoof, it's more than possible that in 10-15 years there will be a clear Remain majority, and a serious campaign to rejoin if there's been a hard Brexit and the EU has proven resilient. That would probably on much worse terms than now (not joing the Euro but forget the rebate) and if you think that is inevitable / likely, then you could argue that a hard Brexit now is not serving our long term interests?
I think appointing him would be a clear sign of the end of 'cake and eat it' negotiation.
He wouldn't declare war - but definitely possible, perhaps likely, he would abandon negotiations and take us out of the EU before March 2019.
Going to a dog-track gave me one of my (few) amusing stories.
It's fairly obvious though that TM isn't digging into the annexes of what I imagine are fairly turgid reports and making sure she is absolutely up to speed on what assumptions the trade gravity models use etc.
https://twitter.com/NicholasGuyatt/status/923473341658394624
Your hypothetical prediction is a good argument for preferring to remain as we are, if you believe it will happen (should we leave). However, I think it's likelier we will either leave now and diverge and stay out, or we will end up remaining (the end of the transition, if there is one, being the tipping point).
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/876894066478329857
Legal friends tell me he did well at justice - particularly since he followed Grayling.
At education he obviously made some very bad mistakes (and was far too bone headed to admit them), but at the same time some of his reforms I think will bear fruit.
Fans protest during Holocaust tribute at Serie A matches
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41762423
1) white men feeling they are victims in today's Britain
2) older people moaning about students
This story neatly combined the two.
You accept you lost.
On the white point: false stories would be less likely to be taken seriously if we hadn't had MPs criticise a judge's appointment in part because he was white and if widespread child rape allegations hadn't been ignored because the victims were WWC and the police didn't want to appear 'culturally insensitive'.
For that matter, Tim Hunt [think I got the name right] was hounded out of his university position for making a joke people didn't like. Or there being too many whites in the FA/Bank of England/BBC.
Well my comment was aimed at the campaign to reduce the amount of white authors which as far as I can see was not reported in error. If the university is resisting so far then great (the racists!), but the pressure is still there and growing.
Anyway, time to be off.
Students moan about the man or the government or their parents perhaps. But old people in general o rather think they ignore.
On the second point - there’s not much point discussing.
Neither they nor the open letter called for the University to replace the white authors with black ones and there are no plans to do so.
https://twitter.com/WikiGuido/status/923511288596172801
I regret to inform you that after careful consideration Paddy Power will not price up your suggestions on what Jared O'Mara might have said in the past about Nelson Mandela.
But given the option of voting to abandon Brexit I might well do that because I still think it is a bad idea.
Its a meaningless survey. The fact that people accept the decision doesn't mean they back Brexit at any cost.
This is literally the first line of the open letter:
"For too long, teaching English at Cambridge has encouraged a ‘traditional’ and ‘canonical’ approach that elevates white male authors at the expense of all others. "
Some of the demands:
"The inclusion of two or more postcolonial and BME authors on every exam paper."
"Greater investment in the Postcolonial Paper by making it a mandatory requirement of Part I and widening teaching and hiring more staff to bring in West/East African and Caribbean materials"
So they want less white males and more BME authors and materials from majority black countries.
So theoretically there might be 40 white authors on the list now, there'll be 40 white authors on the list going forward, just more BME authors as well as per their suggestions.
https://twitter.com/catalannews/status/923514836058804225
Perhaps they'll give odds on his singing anti-Semitic songs when Spurs are playing, or making monkey noises when black players touch the ball.
Similarly if you have a finite number of authors you can study on a course and shoehorn new ones in then you're going to have less of the original ones.
But if you really want to ignore this then I'm sure we can agree at least that the amount of time a course spends on these authors is going to be reduced based purely on them being white and more favoured races chosen instead.
So yes I'm going to stick with my initial reaction to this campaign and its aims.
Although a fall in net migration growth post Brexit means it will reach the 70 million mark 2 years later thsn projected in 2014.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41761292
What do you mean by "it" ?
You’re such a snowflake, looking for offence and outrage when non exists.
Sorry if this post has invaded your safe space.
Of course, making longish term forecasts is always difficult.
I think the most interesting thing in there is that they've cut their life expectancies.
https://mobile.twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/923524566311415809/photo/1
Deeply dispiriting op-ed piece in the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/25/jeff-flake-wont-stop-ascendant-march-trumpism/
You are Marie Antoinette and I claim my five Francs.
The more likely Brexit looks, the greater the economic harm, which makes retreating from Brexit more likely
Nissan agreed to stay in the UK when the government assured them no change. Now change is more likely, Toyota are making noises again.
You only read the Twitter comment and hadn't read the open letter and now I've pointed out what it actually said you've gone into defensive ad-hom mode.