Theresa May is now demob happy. It is clear that she cannot politically survive long, and that her legacy is toxic. No point in looking gloomy, there are lots of walking holidays to look forward to. It is those trying to dodge the poisoned chalice that look glum.
Just think if we could build an ark for Remainers and all the leavers could drown in a flood.
Upside....Literacy would go up crime would go down the national IQ would go up the average age would go down. So no bedblocking plenty of doctors more productive workforce less dependence on the state.
Downside...... Jeremy Kyle would lose his audience....
Quote button is coming up with a 401 Unauthorized message in the console, for those of a technical bent. I suspect it's something that only Vanilla can fix, but fortunately for them it's a rather simpler matter than, oooh, the Irish border.
The quote button has gone all impact assessment for me, too.
@foxinsoxuk , I'm not completely convinced May is demob happy just yet. I get the strong impression that she is one of natures prevaricators in whom the thought of making decisions induces silent agony. When circumstances force her into a situation where she just has to get on with it (eg Barnier's "two days" deadline), no matter how unpromising the circumstances, there is a feeling of relief.
No. It just means that politicians (on all sides) are being cute and the media is in attack dog mode without being nuanced enough to understand what is being said.
For instance: an Impact Assessment includes an analysis of the environment and social consequences of a decision. I don't think it would be a good use of time, for example, to do a sector by sector analysis of the environmental consequences of Brexit because it will largely be in the hands of the government. But without them you haven't done an "Impact Assessment"
No. It just means that politicians (on all sides) are being cute and the media is in attack dog mode without being nuanced enough to understand what is being said.
For instance: an Impact Assessment includes an analysis of the environment and social consequences of a decision. I don't think it would be a good use of time, for example, to do a sector by sector analysis of the environmental consequences of Brexit because it will largely be in the hands of the government. But without them you haven't done an "Impact Assessment"
My goodness, you're in full tornado spin mode today. Mandleson would blush.
@Mortimer This has gone beyond Remain vs. Leave. This is an incompetent government doing real damage to all of us. It's despairing. A competent Leave administration would be better than this.
Brexit cannot be delivered on the basis promised by the Leave campaign leaders now sitting in the Cabinet and on the backbenches. They will blame anyone but themselves for this, even though it was and is obvious. Meanwhile, the Labour party is focused on fighting itself. It’s hard to see how this ends well.
The desperation from the "sane" Brexiters to spin the current shambles is pathetic. At least @rcs1000 admits things are "not necessarily developing according to the UK's advantage"
May is lucky in that given her most likely replacements as PM are Jacob Rees Mogg or Jeremy Corbyn no matter how bad things get for many she will still be the least worst option.
@Scott_P - full quote FYI, "I think that the people of this country have had enough of experts with organisations from acronyms saying - from organisations with acronyms - saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong, because these people - these people - are the same ones who got consistently wrong."
saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong, because these people - these people - are the same ones who got consistently wrong.
A more accurate description of the Brexiteers is hard to find
A slightly fuzzy headed good morning from Newcastle.
The lack of a quote button is appropriate - it mirrors the lunacy of all the quotes of David about the sectoral studies which he now insists never exists in a desperate attempt to not confession to how bad they are.
I shouldn't be surprised that some Tories think this is going well or that "we will get a deal next week". Self preservation through delusion is a wonderful thing
This is a disaster. For the country. For your party. This level of self-immolation only occurs once in a generation. Enjoy it.
@DPJHodges: With Grayling's contradiction of Hammond it's clear that whatever is happening with the negotiations, the Government's communication strategy on Brexit has completely collapsed.
1. Assume that May and the DUP and Eire agree a form of words and phase 1 is achieved. (50% likely IMO). 2. Christmas arrives. 3. May says "Enough chaos" and has a New Year reshuffle. 4. May is seen as succeeding in reaching phase 2, against impossible odds. The media narrative changes.
60% chance, I'd say. The media motto has always been "Simplify, then exagerrate". I share the incredulity that the Government is so shambolic, but if they get a few things right it will create a new story. It will kick the problems down the road as I don't think May can deliver an adequate phase 2, but she'll be pleased to get to that problem.
Incidentally, I wouldn't put too much weight on whether Corbyn does well at PMQs or not. His achievements have been to make Labour interesting to vote for and organising a reasonably disciplined Shadow Cabinet after pressure at hurricane level.
Labour looks competent compared with the Government - strong and stable, you might say - and that is a potential election decider. Our problem has always been that we're often portrayed as well-meaning but incompetent, and the Tory edge has always been that they're seen as competent - which their best friends at the moment really would not claim.
I'm saying that people who oppose yet report on a significant policy like Brexit are not only unable to operate without blinkers, but they're also not aware of the detail of the negotiations.
Things behind closed doors frustrate journos. So guff emanates instead.
I think May is doing ok over Brexit , she is not intransigent and changes her mind constantly.As can be seen by calling the snap election.Therefore an easy person to do a deal with.
GW We have agreed an exit bill, largely settled citizens rights and just need to get the DUP on board over the Irish border.
Come May next year Five Star may have won the Italian general election on current polls leaving open the possibility of a referendum on Italian membership of the Euro if it does not get the concessions it wants. Then things would really get interesting.
@Scott - what did Grayling say about Hammond? Are we talking about this stupid 'we'll pay anyway' even without a trade deal, that No 10 contradicted yesterday?
I'm not splitting hairs. I suspect that others are, which is how Davis will/is justifying what he is saying.
Of course they have done the work (and the Labour party is trying to score points at the cost of the country) but they haven't done the formal report demanded.
It is revealing, too, how heavily Davis relies on the assertion that vital data had to be kept secret lest it fall into the hands of the European commission and inform its negotiating stance. The inference here is that there might be things about the whole Brexit process that the ingenious UK side has thought of but the dull-witted Europeans haven’t thought of yet. The process of the talks so far at every turn has demonstrated the opposite to be true. The pattern has been Europeans flagging up problems well in advance and British politicians denying the existence of those problems, then failing to address them with practical solutions. But a deeper subtext to the Davis argument (one he might not even consciously know) is that it would be a mistake to let the EU know what the UK’s judgment of Brexit’s impact on the domestic economy would be because the impact is so harsh. In other words, if the commission knew that the UK is actually afraid to go through with some of the harder Brexit plans promoted by Theresa May, the talks become a dictation of the terms of surrender. That is indeed the way things have played out so far. The great fear of exposing the government’s hand flows from the relative weakness of the cards it holds. The bluffer fears being called. Of course, the EU side has understood the relative strengths and weaknesses of the UK position for longer and far better than May or Davis. The prime minister and her secretary of state have been kidding themselves. To sustain the delusion, they have tried to avoid scrutiny in parliament and, by extension, deceive the British public. Is the whole of the government’s Brexit strategy built on lies and obfuscation? Well that depends on what your meaning of the word “is” is.
"@Scott_P - full quote FYI, "I think that the people of this country have had enough of experts with organisations from acronyms saying - from organisations with acronyms - saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong, because these people - these people - are the same ones who got consistently wrong."
Also RIP my quote button"
It is perplexing. There are about 10^24 good arguments against Brexit, but Scott can only find three, all of them wrong. Two are "Yebbut lies" about things which were actually true, and the third, "Yebbut experts," itself depends on a huge and easily rumbled lie (quoting what shouty Faisal said Gove said, not what Gove in fact said).
@Charles When the government starts blaming the opposition for opposing, it really is all over. You are the Large Hadron Collider of hair splitters today.
@Scott_P Side-splitting as always. Your 'experts' remark is still based on wilful misinterpretation of a partial quote though, but you keep trotting it out because it suits your worldview.
" I don't think it would be a good use of time, for example, to do a sector by sector analysis of the environmental consequences of Brexit because it will largely be in the hands of the government."
Were I in govt, were I SoS for LtEU. I would have done them. But, you know, we have the experts in charge.
Hi Edmund. I remember a few years ago you were very keen on Bitcoins. Did you get any in the end?
Bitcoin used to be an interesting if weird payment method but it's now a pure pyramid scheme, don't touch it with a bargepole.
Putting your money in a conventional pyramid scheme would actually be better, because a normal pyramid scheme is zero sum: Anything that's taken out in profits has to be paid for by some equal and opposite "investor" in losses. Whereas bitcoin also burns money for mining, so the expected overall profit is zero, minus something like 25 million dollars per day.
@Charles - yes I've written a couple of impact assessments and read many. I wouldn't fancy having to do one for Brexit.
When I did them they were compulsory and normally required approval by the Regulatory Policy Committee if costs/benefits were over a certain threshold.
They were supposed to outline a list of options from which policy makers chose. Of course in practice you write the impact assessment after you've chosen and justify your choice.
Which would be rather difficult in the case of Brexit.
In any case - DD has been clear that he doesn't think there is value to this kind of analysis.
So even if it had been done, it would have been ignored.
May is in certain danger, no deal is ahead The little David Davis laid down politically dead The EU stars in the bright sky looked down at the Tory mob The little David Davis was asleep on the job
The DUP are crowing and the Tories awake But Rees-Mogg said pink lines he'll certainly not make I love thee, EU Brexit, look down from the sky And stand by me Arlene Foster till the confidence vote is nigh
Be near me dear Boris, I ask thee to stay Close by me forever and love me I pray Bless all the Tory MP's in my tender care And take us past Brexit to live in paradise fair.
Ah, impact assessments. My absolute favourite is the one about the impact on the LGBT community of the third runway at Heathrow.
It shows the paucity of independent thought on the green benches that so many MPs are desperate for nurse to tell them the consequences of decisions. There are plenty of reports they could read by the Big 4, law firms, think tanks etc but they retain their absolute faith in and dependence on the civil service.
Those girly swots at the EP have done their homework, and even published it. DD just needs some cut and paste and he can come up with a dodgy dossier in 45 min:
@NickPalmer - the Labour party is on the verge of readmitting George Galloway and the owner of Momentum Ltd wants to rerun the entire selection process for all London 2018 local election candidates. It is spot on that Labour is interesting, but it is doing all it can to ensure that it continues to lose to the catastrophically inept Conservative party. I get that does not matter to people who have never needed a Labour government or had cause to fear a Tory one (see the current Labour leadership team, for example), but it is not necessarily good for the country.
It is unlikely I will ever warm to Brexit, but I cannot accept a Brexit which is carried out through a "policy" of deception, prevarication, and incompetence.
Above all we need a PM who will speak the truth. Brexit is not a walk in the park. Those against it are not saboteurs. Brexit is not a private matter for certain Tories only and a clear understanding of the effect on our future cannot be a secret (or worse, a matter of indifference).
Galloway: against. When I last saw him, he called me a murderer, which seemed a bit unfraternal. (He was thinking of Iraq, to be fair.) I don't think it matters much in practical terms, but it would give a stick to beat us with.
Almost as if May and Foster cooked up the whole stunt on Monday to try to turn the tables and get the EU to accept ‘equivalence’ as the baseline going into phase two.
"Side-splitting as always. Your 'experts' remark is still based on wilful misinterpretation of a partial quote though, but you keep trotting it out because it suits your worldview."
Thing is, if you are a politician, you are aware of the mood music that your pronouncements are set to. You know what impression you want to make. You drop words and phrases into a general comment and are aware of exactly what conclusion people will come to.
Or you should do, if you are a competent politician.
The interesting thing about that independent front page is (if we are seeing the same adverts) on the right, the one advertising Niall Horan's album "Flicker" which in the font it is, early in the morning, at first appears to be a different word altogether.
Why does the owner of a private company, Momentum Ltd, get to decide who Labour’s election candidates are?
What exactly is the relationship between Labour and this private company?
Are both parties complying with data protection laws in relation to information about people signing up to one or other of them?
If Momentum is acting as a political party, has it complied with all the various laws which apply to political parties?
What are the funding arrangements between Momentum and Labour?
On topic: we should press the pause button on Brexit and, in light of what we now know, decide whether we really want to go through with it. If we do, then we start again with a competent ie different team in charge and having done all the necessary preparatory work first.
"yes I've written a couple of impact assessments and read many. I wouldn't fancy having to do one for Brexit."
You're correct. They are worth a little less than the paper they're written on. They were always meant to be a bureaucratic exercise and little else.
A point DD might validly have made months ago, rather than pretending they'd actually been done. As it is, trying to defend him is simply embarrassing.
They are useful because if, say, one were to state: "we will use our Austen Allegro to reach the moon and then build our plant there." then that would force those people who wanted to reach the moon to ask themselves: well how _are_ we going to get there?
The interesting thing about that independent front page is (if we are seeing the same adverts) on the right, the one advertising Niall Horan's album "Flicker" which in the font it is, early in the morning, at first appears to be a different word altogether.
I posted about bitcoin last week or early this week. It has all the hallmarks of the Southsea bubble about it. Some will have made fortunes, whilst others will have their finances wrecked IMHO>
Cyclefree None of which would remotely change the fact we still have to leave the single market to end free movement with a FTA the only trade deal on option and the DUP still having to be reconciled on the Irish border
F1: small amount available on Red Bull at 9.2 on Betfair Exchange to win the Constructors.
I think there's the smallest difference between the Red Bull drivers of any top lineup, and both are very competent. I suspect the Constructors will be between Mercedes and Red Bull, depending on whether the Renault engine is good enough. Also, those odds are longer than those for either Red Bull driver to get the title, which is out of whack.
Imagine Verstappen (just over 3/1 on Betfair Sportsbook) wins the title. That means he outscores Hamilton. Under those circumstances, would you favour Ricciardo or Bottas to score more?
RoyalBlue Posts: 1,315 9:24AM @Cyclefree 17.4 million of us want to go through with it. That's what the referendum was for. There is no blank slate or status quo to return to. Flag Quote · Off Topic
Can't seem to use the quote button forsome reason!
Recent opinion polls also suggest that the general population still want Brexit I doubt if another referendum would change that.
What happens if you try do this? You start by making assumptions, and those assumptions are subjective. Let's assume it takes ten years to design a space rocket that is economical etc Historians can't agree on history, how would they get on with the future?
Have you ever read the Foundation trio of sci-fi novels by Isaac Asimov?
Thanks all - News of my demise may have been somewhat overstated.
That said I have been unable to follow PB for most of the past six months. Perhaps a member might post a summary of the hatched, matched, dispatched and glittering adventures of our merry band of troopers over the period.
Comments
Theresa May is now demob happy. It is clear that she cannot politically survive long, and that her legacy is toxic. No point in looking gloomy, there are lots of walking holidays to look forward to. It is those trying to dodge the poisoned chalice that look glum.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42263157
Another merger, acquisition by Ladbrokes/Corals.
Upside....Literacy would go up crime would go down the national IQ would go up the average age would go down. So no bedblocking plenty of doctors more productive workforce less dependence on the state.
Downside...... Jeremy Kyle would lose his audience....
Dublin is feeling the heat already.
@foxinsoxuk , I'm not completely convinced May is demob happy just yet. I get the strong impression that she is one of natures prevaricators in whom the thought of making decisions induces silent agony. When circumstances force her into a situation where she just has to get on with it (eg Barnier's "two days" deadline), no matter how unpromising the circumstances, there is a feeling of relief.
@DPJHodges: I wish England's cricketers could play with as straight a bat as Chris Grayling.
No. It just means that politicians (on all sides) are being cute and the media is in attack dog mode without being nuanced enough to understand what is being said.
For instance: an Impact Assessment includes an analysis of the environment and social consequences of a decision. I don't think it would be a good use of time, for example, to do a sector by sector analysis of the environmental consequences of Brexit because it will largely be in the hands of the government. But without them you haven't done an "Impact Assessment"
"Regulatory equivalence" would be a fantastic win for the UK, so I doubt it!
He seems supremely qualified to be on the UK gov Brexit negotiating team, Tessy's missed a trick.
Hence the continual whine.
Not spinning, just trying to understand the spin that is going on
You are doing a fine job at splitting hairs to defend the indefensible.
Remember when omnishambles meant VAT on hot pasties, rather than an existential threat to our place in the world?
Brexit is an unflushable floating turd.
People with an axe to grind reporting and analysing people with an axe to grind.
Mrs May will survive; and a deal will likely be done by the beginning of next week.
Yes, things ARE that bad.
Unless those things include the non functioning quote button....
Also RIP my quote button
The lack of a quote button is appropriate - it mirrors the lunacy of all the quotes of David about the sectoral studies which he now insists never exists in a desperate attempt to not confession to how bad they are.
I shouldn't be surprised that some Tories think this is going well or that "we will get a deal next week". Self preservation through delusion is a wonderful thing
This is a disaster. For the country. For your party. This level of self-immolation only occurs once in a generation. Enjoy it.
1. Assume that May and the DUP and Eire agree a form of words and phase 1 is achieved. (50% likely IMO).
2. Christmas arrives.
3. May says "Enough chaos" and has a New Year reshuffle.
4. May is seen as succeeding in reaching phase 2, against impossible odds. The media narrative changes.
60% chance, I'd say. The media motto has always been "Simplify, then exagerrate". I share the incredulity that the Government is so shambolic, but if they get a few things right it will create a new story. It will kick the problems down the road as I don't think May can deliver an adequate phase 2, but she'll be pleased to get to that problem.
Incidentally, I wouldn't put too much weight on whether Corbyn does well at PMQs or not. His achievements have been to make Labour interesting to vote for and organising a reasonably disciplined Shadow Cabinet after pressure at hurricane level.
Labour looks competent compared with the Government - strong and stable, you might say - and that is a potential election decider. Our problem has always been that we're often portrayed as well-meaning but incompetent, and the Tory edge has always been that they're seen as competent - which their best friends at the moment really would not claim.
I'm saying that people who oppose yet report on a significant policy like Brexit are not only unable to operate without blinkers, but they're also not aware of the detail of the negotiations.
Things behind closed doors frustrate journos. So guff emanates instead.
Come May next year Five Star may have won the Italian general election on current polls leaving open the possibility of a referendum on Italian membership of the Euro if it does not get the concessions it wants. Then things would really get interesting.
I think we can all agree on that. Our definitions of 'interesting' might be slightly different, though.
I'm not splitting hairs. I suspect that others are, which is how Davis will/is justifying what he is saying.
Of course they have done the work (and the Labour party is trying to score points at the cost of the country) but they haven't done the formal report demanded.
It is revealing, too, how heavily Davis relies on the assertion that vital data had to be kept secret lest it fall into the hands of the European commission and inform its negotiating stance. The inference here is that there might be things about the whole Brexit process that the ingenious UK side has thought of but the dull-witted Europeans haven’t thought of yet. The process of the talks so far at every turn has demonstrated the opposite to be true. The pattern has been Europeans flagging up problems well in advance and British politicians denying the existence of those problems, then failing to address them with practical solutions.
But a deeper subtext to the Davis argument (one he might not even consciously know) is that it would be a mistake to let the EU know what the UK’s judgment of Brexit’s impact on the domestic economy would be because the impact is so harsh. In other words, if the commission knew that the UK is actually afraid to go through with some of the harder Brexit plans promoted by Theresa May, the talks become a dictation of the terms of surrender. That is indeed the way things have played out so far. The great fear of exposing the government’s hand flows from the relative weakness of the cards it holds.
The bluffer fears being called. Of course, the EU side has understood the relative strengths and weaknesses of the UK position for longer and far better than May or Davis. The prime minister and her secretary of state have been kidding themselves. To sustain the delusion, they have tried to avoid scrutiny in parliament and, by extension, deceive the British public. Is the whole of the government’s Brexit strategy built on lies and obfuscation? Well that depends on what your meaning of the word “is” is.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/dec/06/david-davis-bluffing-brexit-clear-impact-assessments
Side-splitting as always. Your 'experts' remark is still based on wilful misinterpretation of a partial quote though, but you keep trotting it out because it suits your worldview.
" I don't think it would be a good use of time, for example, to do a sector by sector analysis of the environmental consequences of Brexit because it will largely be in the hands of the government."
Were I in govt, were I SoS for LtEU. I would have done them. But, you know, we have the experts in charge.
Putting your money in a conventional pyramid scheme would actually be better, because a normal pyramid scheme is zero sum: Anything that's taken out in profits has to be paid for by some equal and opposite "investor" in losses. Whereas bitcoin also burns money for mining, so the expected overall profit is zero, minus something like 25 million dollars per day.
I wouldn't fancy having to do one for Brexit.
When I did them they were compulsory and normally required approval by the Regulatory Policy Committee if costs/benefits were over a certain threshold.
They were supposed to outline a list of options from which policy makers chose.
Of course in practice you write the impact assessment after you've chosen and justify your choice.
Which would be rather difficult in the case of Brexit.
In any case - DD has been clear that he doesn't think there is value to this kind of analysis.
So even if it had been done, it would have been ignored.
May is in certain danger, no deal is ahead
The little David Davis laid down politically dead
The EU stars in the bright sky looked down at the Tory mob
The little David Davis was asleep on the job
The DUP are crowing and the Tories awake
But Rees-Mogg said pink lines he'll certainly not make
I love thee, EU Brexit, look down from the sky
And stand by me Arlene Foster till the confidence vote is nigh
Be near me dear Boris, I ask thee to stay
Close by me forever and love me I pray
Bless all the Tory MP's in my tender care
And take us past Brexit to live in paradise fair.
It shows the paucity of independent thought on the green benches that so many MPs are desperate for nurse to tell them the consequences of decisions. There are plenty of reports they could read by the Big 4, law firms, think tanks etc but they retain their absolute faith in and dependence on the civil service.
https://twitter.com/EPinUK/status/935513355598561280
Wondering who this government and its supporters will blame next.
It is unlikely I will ever warm to Brexit, but I cannot accept a Brexit which is carried out through a "policy" of deception, prevarication, and incompetence.
Above all we need a PM who will speak the truth. Brexit is not a walk in the park. Those against it are not saboteurs. Brexit is not a private matter for certain Tories only and a clear understanding of the effect on our future cannot be a secret (or worse, a matter of indifference).
Goodbye May.
You lack courage and conciliation.
Galloway: against. When I last saw him, he called me a murderer, which seemed a bit unfraternal. (He was thinking of Iraq, to be fair.) I don't think it matters much in practical terms, but it would give a stick to beat us with.
Almost as if May and Foster cooked up the whole stunt on Monday to try to turn the tables and get the EU to accept ‘equivalence’ as the baseline going into phase two.
Can you imagine THE GOVES in Downing St! They make the Borgias look benign
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/michael-gove-conservative-leader-next-prime-minister-sarah-vine-rupert-murdoch-daily-mail-personal-a7111656.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-not-standing-conservative-leadership-eu-brexit-ambition-country-paid-price-a7111151.html
With good long standing members leaving to be replaced by armchair Marxists the return of Galloway would be a symbolic backwards step.
I would say it was the final straw, but that would grant George a status he doesn't deserve.
Welcome back, My Lord!
"Side-splitting as always. Your 'experts' remark is still based on wilful misinterpretation of a partial quote though, but you keep trotting it out because it suits your worldview."
Thing is, if you are a politician, you are aware of the mood music that your pronouncements are set to. You know what impression you want to make. You drop words and phrases into a general comment and are aware of exactly what conclusion people will come to.
Or you should do, if you are a competent politician.
Nice to see you back, Old Timer.
Logical Song and I were lamenting earlier the lack of an eminent Statesman to lead us out of this sorry mess. Perhaps if you are not too busy.....
Kinder.
Fairer.
The interesting thing about that independent front page is (if we are seeing the same adverts) on the right, the one advertising Niall Horan's album "Flicker" which in the font it is, early in the morning, at first appears to be a different word altogether.
"yes I've written a couple of impact assessments and read many.
I wouldn't fancy having to do one for Brexit."
You're correct. They are worth a little less than the paper they're written on. They were always meant to be a bureaucratic exercise and little else.
Only those who know nothing about them have any faith.
What exactly is the relationship between Labour and this private company?
Are both parties complying with data protection laws in relation to information about people signing up to one or other of them?
If Momentum is acting as a political party, has it complied with all the various laws which apply to political parties?
What are the funding arrangements between Momentum and Labour?
On topic: we should press the pause button on Brexit and, in light of what we now know, decide whether we really want to go through with it. If we do, then we start again with a competent ie different team in charge and having done all the necessary preparatory work first.
The 'value' of bitcoin is getting ridiculous! I wonder who will be hiy worst if/when the bubble bursts.
The old adage about Main street going to Wall street comes to mind
I wouldn't fancy having to do one for Brexit."
You're correct. They are worth a little less than the paper they're written on. They were always meant to be a bureaucratic exercise and little else.
A point DD might validly have made months ago, rather than pretending they'd actually been done.
As it is, trying to defend him is simply embarrassing.
Welcome back.
They are useful because if, say, one were to state: "we will use our Austen Allegro to reach the moon and then build our plant there." then that would force those people who wanted to reach the moon to ask themselves: well how _are_ we going to get there?
Etc..
I think there's the smallest difference between the Red Bull drivers of any top lineup, and both are very competent. I suspect the Constructors will be between Mercedes and Red Bull, depending on whether the Renault engine is good enough. Also, those odds are longer than those for either Red Bull driver to get the title, which is out of whack.
Imagine Verstappen (just over 3/1 on Betfair Sportsbook) wins the title. That means he outscores Hamilton. Under those circumstances, would you favour Ricciardo or Bottas to score more?
9:24AM
@Cyclefree 17.4 million of us want to go through with it. That's what the referendum was for. There is no blank slate or status quo to return to.
Flag Quote · Off Topic
Can't seem to use the quote button forsome reason!
Recent opinion polls also suggest that the general population still want Brexit I doubt if another referendum would change that.
https://order-order.com/2017/12/07/jezza-backs-sick-coffin-stunt-targetting-female-tory-mp/
That's exactly what they are intended to do.
What happens if you try do this? You start by making assumptions, and those assumptions are subjective. Let's assume it takes ten years to design a space rocket that is economical etc Historians can't agree on history, how would they get on with the future?
Have you ever read the Foundation trio of sci-fi novels by Isaac Asimov?
That said I have been unable to follow PB for most of the past six months. Perhaps a member might post a summary of the hatched, matched, dispatched and glittering adventures of our merry band of troopers over the period.
Will pop back after lunch.
BREAKING: Electoral Commission investigating Momentum election spending.
Ho Ho Ho