politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The YouGov Brexit tracker continues to show that those who thi

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The YouGov Brexit tracker continues to show that those who think it is wrong have the edge

With all that has been going on with Donald Trump I have yet to post on PB my regular chart showing the trend in YouGov’s Brexit tracker since the referendum took place.

Read the full story here

rottenborough

1st

Sunil_Prasannan

2nd like REMAIN (When it mattered!)

rottenborough

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

RobD

Is it within the margin of error of the margin of error?

Titters...

tlg86

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

Philip_Thompson

I feel like there's a tendency in polls to go against the government when there isn't an election, hence midterm blues and then swing back.

Given that the government is now pro Brexit that leads anyone wanting to kick the government to say it was Wrong.

DavidL

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

Philip_Thompson

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

RoyalBlue

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

tlg86

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

DavidL

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Its not as visceral or gripping as Dunkirk, which I thought was outstanding, but you will enjoy it.

Recidivist

Philip_Thompson said:

I feel like there's a tendency in polls to go against the government when there isn't an election, hence midterm blues and then swing back.

Given that the government is now pro Brexit that leads anyone wanting to kick the government to say it was Wrong.

Yeah. Sure. That must be it.

John_M

Saw the Darkest Hour. Oldman's finest hour, tube scene cringeworthy, Scott-Thomas wasted.

Morris_Dancer

Ha. The way people are speaking of the Tube scene I wonder if they'll do a Director's Cut to remove it.

Anyway, I must be off for a nocturnal perambulation.

MarqueeMark

John_M said:

Saw the Darkest Hour. Oldman's finest hour, tube scene cringeworthy, Scott-Thomas wasted.

Oldman flawless in a flawed film.

DavidL

John_M said:

Saw the Darkest Hour. Oldman's finest hour, tube scene cringeworthy, Scott-Thomas wasted.

I thought she was good and Oldman was indeed superb.

OldKingCole

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

MaxPB

I watched The Post recently at a screening, it was really good but there were a few complaints about it. I read about why and basically they have rewritten history to remove the three men who made the pentagon papers happen and given credit to a woman editor who was at best marginal.

Recidivist

I feel there must be a level of polling where leavers concede that they'll never get the piano up the stairs. I don't imagine 4% will do it, but it must kick in by the time we get to 10%.

MikeSmithson

DavidL said:

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Its not as visceral or gripping as Dunkirk, which I thought was outstanding, but you will enjoy it.

I found Dunkirk boring

DavidL

MikeSmithson said:

DavidL said:

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Its not as visceral or gripping as Dunkirk, which I thought was outstanding, but you will enjoy it.

I found Dunkirk boring

Really? Did you guess the ending? I have to say that there were several moments when the bullets were flying around that I was not the only person in the cinema who felt a need to duck. Not sure how it will be on TV but in the cinema I thought it was engrossing.

tlg86

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

I don't doubt it. But the original post was suggesting that some children can't come to terms with the way their parents voted.

I haven't heard these stories with regards to Scottish Independence. But had Yes won, we could have seen something similar but in reverse.

volcanopete

MikeSmithson said:

DavidL said:

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Its not as visceral or gripping as Dunkirk, which I thought was outstanding, but you will enjoy it.

I found Dunkirk boring

It wrote out the French perspective completely.

williamglenn

Recidivist said:

I feel there must be a level of polling where leavers concede that they'll never get the piano up the stairs. I don't imagine 4% will do it, but it must kick in by the time we get to 10%.

It does become slightly absurd to act as if leaving the single market and ending free movement is an absolute imperative when all the polling evidence is that there is now a majority for Remain.

MarqueeMark

Those who came second, continuing to obsess over what might have been.

Or have they been visitied by The Ghost of Brexit Future?

tlg86

volcanopete said:

MikeSmithson said:

DavidL said:

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Its not as visceral or gripping as Dunkirk, which I thought was outstanding, but you will enjoy it.

I found Dunkirk boring

It wrote out the French perspective completely.

I think that's harsh. The film didn't set out to provide a thorough account of what happened. I'm sure there are plenty of documentaries which do that.

The film was about three stories that came together in the film. My only gripe was that I thought they did a bit too much of an overlap as the stories came together, but I guess they wanted to make it obvious to the likes of my parents who are easily confused by any movie that has anything other than a linear timeline!

Recidivist

williamglenn said:

Recidivist said:

I feel there must be a level of polling where leavers concede that they'll never get the piano up the stairs. I don't imagine 4% will do it, but it must kick in by the time we get to 10%.

It does become slightly absurd to act as if leaving the single market and ending free movement is an absolute imperative when all the polling evidence is that there is now a majority for Remain.

Exactly. It is arguable that the project should have gone ahead in the expectation that people would fall in behind it. But as support is falling you have to question how long the show can stay on the road.

Rebourne_Fluffy

MikeSmithson said:

DavidL said:

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Its not as visceral or gripping as Dunkirk, which I thought was outstanding, but you will enjoy it.

I found Dunkirk boring

I think that we are discussing the film and not the ferry-port.

:should-'ave-gone-to-calais:

houndtang

Even if true, thinking something is a mistake is not quite the same as wanting to stop it

RoyalBlue

Recidivist said:

I feel there must be a level of polling where leavers concede that they'll never get the piano up the stairs. I don't imagine 4% will do it, but it must kick in by the time we get to 10%.

Opinion polls are not reason enough to stop Brexit. They are a reason to ask the people again, or to fight a general election on the subject.

A gap of 10% for 3 months would seem a reasonable trigger.

rcs1000

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Churchill comes to an accommodation with Hitler, millions of Russians avoid death at the hands of Stalin, and the British Empire is saved.

brendan16

It's all pretty marginal stuff - 4 per cent - and rather academic. You gov also had remain 4 per cent ahead in its final poll at 10 pm on 23 June 2016. Who says leave isn't actually 4 per cent ahead on this measure given that you gov didn't exactly predict the original result on the actual day of the vote!

But even if we believe it - so what. 20 per cent maybe - but 4 per cent?

And regretting isn't the same as caring enough to want to stop it. And Tory voters are still massively pro Brexit and they are the voters the Tories want to keep - solid remainer Lib Dems and Greens are never going to vote for them anytime soon.

rcs1000

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

We've told our kids that the money will go entirely to one of them, using a formula based on how many characters there are in a particular Wikipedia article at the point of death.

The edit wars are going to be awesome to watch.

williamglenn

houndtang said:

Even if true, thinking something is a mistake is not quite the same as wanting to stop it

There's another nuance which is that it's possible to think that it was right for us to *vote* to leave in 2016, while not actually wanting to leave, and being ready to vote Remain in a second referendum.

stevef

But the reason why polls show a slight lead for Remain is because Remoaners have all the media attention, the media is focussing overwhelmingly on the critique against Brexit. Things would be quite different in a referendum campaign with both sides being given attention.

And its worth saying again: it doesnt matter what the polls say 1). because we do not have government by opinion poll 2). because the decision to leave has been made by the People in June 2016.

Remoaners jump at these polls as if somehow the vote has not been held already.

williamglenn

stevef said:

But the reason why polls show a slight lead for Remain is because Remoaners have all the media attention, the media is focussing overwhelmingly on the critique against Brexit. Things would be quite different in a referendum campaign with both sides being given attention.

In the context of a second referendum, giving attention to Leave will not be helpful to their cause. Who would represent them and what would their message be? It will no longer be sufficient to parrot slogans like "take back control" when people will already know that the reality is very different.

OldKingCole

rcs1000 said:

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

We've told our kids that the money will go entirely to one of them, using a formula based on how many characters there are in a particular Wikipedia article at the point of death.

The edit wars are going to be awesome to watch.

One of you won’t see it!

AlastairMeeks

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

ydoethur

OldKingCole said:

rcs1000 said:

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

We've told our kids that the money will go entirely to one of them, using a formula based on how many characters there are in a particular Wikipedia article at the point of death.

The edit wars are going to be awesome to watch.

One of you won’t see it!

On the contrary, 'point of death' means they *will* have to be alive, as changes post mortem won't count.

HYUFD

Most Labour voters voted Remain, most Labour seats voted Leave

Philip_Thompson

rcs1000 said:

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

We've told our kids that the money will go entirely to one of them, using a formula based on how many characters there are in a particular Wikipedia article at the point of death.

The edit wars are going to be awesome to watch.

Very funny! :-D

tlg86

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

HYUFD

rcs1000 said:

RoyalBlue said:

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Churchill comes to an accommodation with Hitler, millions of Russians avoid death at the hands of Stalin, and the British Empire is saved.

Hitler would still have tried to invade, it was just delaying the inevitable

Theuniondivvie

https://twitter.com/quantick/status/952145099051421696

HYUFD

Khan's address to the Fabian Society interrupted by pro Brexit and pro Trump supporters
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-42677726/mayor-sadiq-khan-s-speech-interrupted-by-protesters

AlastairMeeks

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

If Remain had won 52:48 Nigel Farage would still be honking on, invited on every other edition of Question Time. But the country wouldn't be set to undergo massive disruption while the debate continued.

Brexit has failed to convince the doubters. The cultists should stop to reflect on why their fantasy seems to be losing rather than gaining support as it approaches.

Casino_Royale

Two things happened after late April/early May last year: Theresa May shot herself in both feet, and nearly lost the election, and the negotiations started. Since when, the coverage has been almost entirely about bill payments and difficulties over the Irish border and EU citizens.

I would be surprised if this numbers changed back into the positive before the transition deal and heads-of-terms of the final deal were announced, when the Government can start selling its wins. But, perhaps not even then given how toxic Theresa May now is.

Philip_Thompson

AlastairMeeks said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

If Remain had won 52:48 Nigel Farage would still be honking on, invited on every other edition of Question Time. But the country wouldn't be set to undergo massive disruption while the debate continued.

Brexit has failed to convince the doubters. The cultists should stop to reflect on why their fantasy seems to be losing rather than gaining support as it approaches.

What you don't realise is you are one of the cultists.

The mainstream that makes up the government doesn't need to stop they need to get on with it and make it work. The government won't be judged in hindsight in 2022 on whether they stopped or not, they'll be judged on their results.

stevef

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

Casino_Royale

On Darkest Hour, the analysis of the other posters is spot on.

Gary Oldman is great. Kristen Scott-Thomas as Clementine is superb. Viscount Halifax is a very good likeness. Lots of people all round who can't pronounce the letter r.

The tube scene is very, very cheesy, and almost ruined the film.

I'm surprised they shot it, let alone left it in.

viewcode

DavidL said:

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Luke blows up the Death Star in the end.

malcolmg

DavidL said:

Just back from Darkest Hour. Very good but the tube scene seemed contrived and artificial. It would have been a better film without it. Kirsteen Scott Thomas outstanding.

Agree totally David, great film but that tube scene was a bit silly

williamglenn

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

John_M

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

Because May is heading a minority administration. Honestly William, do try and keep up.

Casino_Royale

Philip_Thompson said:

AlastairMeeks said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

If Remain had won 52:48 Nigel Farage would still be honking on, invited on every other edition of Question Time. But the country wouldn't be set to undergo massive disruption while the debate continued.

Brexit has failed to convince the doubters. The cultists should stop to reflect on why their fantasy seems to be losing rather than gaining support as it approaches.

What you don't realise is you are one of the cultists.

The mainstream that makes up the government doesn't need to stop they need to get on with it and make it work. The government won't be judged in hindsight in 2022 on whether they stopped or not, they'll be judged on their results.

It's a question that could give a very different answer in 5-10 years time.

Or not.

Right now, it's measuring work-in-progress, influenced by the Government's popularity, Theresa May's fall from grace, and people's dismay at the polarisation of the country.

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

As Arlene Foster's Party represents part of the UK in the UK Parliament which will determine the policy

rottenborough

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

Indeed. Talking of the kids rallying against their parents - I've been binge-watching Ken Burns Vietnam series. Deeply impressive work and very moving.

HYUFD

Casino_Royale said:

On Darkest Hour, the analysis of the other posters is spot on.

Gary Oldman is great. Kristen Scott-Thomas as Clementine is superb. Viscount Halifax is a very good likeness. Lots of people all round who can't pronounce the letter r.

The tube scene is very, very cheesy, and almost ruined the film.

I'm surprised they shot it, let alone left it in.

I am also going in an hour, so please could we hold off before we get the entire synopsis of the film. Thanks!

dr_spyn

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

Bear shit found in woods shock. Pope found to be Roman and Catholic.

Given the closeness of the vote it is hardly surprising that some families might be divided, but once again, that tweeter's attempt to stir is never far below the surface. Just going our to find large pinch of salt.

OldKingCole

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

rcs1000 said:

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

We've told our kids that the money will go entirely to one of them, using a formula based on how many characters there are in a particular Wikipedia article at the point of death.

The edit wars are going to be awesome to watch.

One of you won’t see it!

On the contrary, 'point of death' means they *will* have to be alive, as changes post mortem won't count.

Only if rcs1000 and Mrs rcs1000 are at deaths door at the same time.

williamglenn

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

As Arlene Foster's Party represents part of the UK in the UK Parliament which will determine the policy

So the UK is sovereign but Britain isn’t? Except the UK isn’t sovereign either because the Good Friday Agreement makes the position of Northern Ireland contingent on the relationship with the Republic of Ireland.

tlg86

OldKingCole said:

ydoethur said:

OldKingCole said:

rcs1000 said:

OldKingCole said:

tlg86 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

tlg86 said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/952215120909922304

The "children" should be careful. It's very easy to change a will.

That's pathetic. Love for your children should transcend politics and it's not as if this is the first time politically kids have gone against their parents.

I agree, there is nothing worse than seeing a will be contested by the kids (though, sometimes, I can see why a parent has cut them out).

What's interesting is that I suspect in the past it was the parents that were disapproving of their children's politics. Today it's the other way round.

Neither my wife, nor myself gave any thought to our children’s politics when we made our wills. There are a few small political/charitable bequests.... Amnesty and so on, but as far the family are concerned they are all equal.

We've told our kids that the money will go entirely to one of them, using a formula based on how many characters there are in a particular Wikipedia article at the point of death.

The edit wars are going to be awesome to watch.

One of you won’t see it!

On the contrary, 'point of death' means they *will* have to be alive, as changes post mortem won't count.

Only if rcs1000 and Mrs rcs1000 are at deaths door at the same time.

What they haven't considered is that it provides motive for their kids to bump them off!

Casino_Royale

HYUFD said:

Casino_Royale said:

On Darkest Hour, the analysis of the other posters is spot on.

Gary Oldman is great. Kristen Scott-Thomas as Clementine is superb. Viscount Halifax is a very good likeness. Lots of people all round who can't pronounce the letter r.

The tube scene is very, very cheesy, and almost ruined the film.

I'm surprised they shot it, let alone left it in.

I am also going in an hour, so please could we hold off before we get the entire synopsis of the film. Thanks!

Sorry! That's it from me.

DecrepitJohnL

deleted

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

As Arlene Foster's Party represents part of the UK in the UK Parliament which will determine the policy

So the UK is sovereign but Britain isn’t? Except the UK isn’t sovereign either because the Good Friday Agreement makes the position of Northern Ireland contingent on the relationship with the Republic of Ireland.

There is a country called the UK, there is no country called Britain, just a geographical entity.

The fact the UK tries to get a good relationship with the Republic while respecting more people in NI are Unionists than Nationalists does not change that.

TheScreamingEagles

The Darkest Hour is great with some major flaws.

Gary Oldman is magnificent.

The Gathering Storm remains my favourite Churchill related film.

Luckyguy1983

It really is quite unseemly the way the usual Remain suspects are jumping on the first sliver of a poll lead suggesting more people think Brexit was a mistake to renew their calls for a new referendum. Personally I'm astonished that the mobilisation of the entire political and media class behind the collective Brexit bedwetting has not produced strong and sustained poll leads for Remain.

TheScreamingEagles

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

https://twitter.com/UKIP/status/952148963309883393

Scott_P

Luckyguy1983 said:

It really is quite unseemly the way the usual Remain suspects are jumping on the first sliver of a poll lead suggesting more people think Brexit was a mistake to renew their calls for a new referendum.

...like Nigel.

kle4

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

williamglenn

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

williamglenn

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

TheScreamingEagles

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

Philip_Thompson

viewcode said:

DavidL said:

No more spoilers! I’m on my way to see it

Luke blows up the Death Star in the end.

I never saw it coming that Himmler was Churchill's father.

Scott_P

https://twitter.com/johnrentoul/status/952268277186727940

Brom

This margin of error tracker just isn't moving quickly enough. To force another referendum before March 2019 surely Remain needed to be polling consistent 10 point leads by now across all pollsters, but they're not coming close with any pollster at this moment in time despite banging on the door across the media. You only have to go on twitter to sense the panic from your AC Grayling sorts (Scott P take note!) as it sinks in that this won't be reversed.

I am impressed by the resilience of leave voters, though the economic picture is decent enough at the moment it's still surprising that even the floating centre ground leave voters haven't changed their tune in any significant number given how much they were told they should be regretting their decision.

What can we expect this year? Have the arch remainers got anything left to throw at stopping Brexit? It seems they've made a bigger pigs ear of the past 18 months than Theresa by being poorly organised, lacking leadership and pushing home the wrong message.

Brom

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

Parliamentary arithmetic.

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

williamglenn

Brom said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

They don't even need to say they were wrong to back Brexit. They can say that Brexit was a vote to reject the Cameron, Clegg, Blair and Adonis approach of being mealy-mouthed about the EU and trying to have it both ways. Either we're in or we're out, but let's not have any half measures.

TheScreamingEagles

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

England is a ceremonial country?

Tell that to the 80,000 England fans that will be going to Twickenham very soon.

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

Brom said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

They don't even need to say they were wrong to back Brexit. They can say that Brexit was a vote to reject the Cameron, Clegg, Blair and Adonis approach of being mealy-mouthed about the EU and trying to have it both ways. Either we're in or we're out, but let's not have any half measures.

Why would they wish to do that?

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

England is a ceremonial country?

Tell that to the 80,000 England fans that will be going to Twickenham very soon.

Same as Essex county cricket fans in political terms, in fact even less so as Essex has its own council and England does not have its own parliament

Scott_P

Brom said:

This margin of error tracker just isn't moving quickly enough. To force another referendum before March 2019 surely Remain needed to be polling consistent 10 point leads by now across all pollsters, but they're not coming close with any pollster at this moment in time despite banging on the door across the media. You only have to go on twitter to sense the panic from your AC Grayling sorts (Scott P take note!) as it sinks in that this won't be reversed.

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/952274557087440897

williamglenn

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Brom said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

They don't even need to say they were wrong to back Brexit. They can say that Brexit was a vote to reject the Cameron, Clegg, Blair and Adonis approach of being mealy-mouthed about the EU and trying to have it both ways. Either we're in or we're out, but let's not have any half measures.

Why would they wish to do that?

Because support for Brexit is unsustainable and it's the best way of reframing the question to save face.

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Brom said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

They don't even need to say they were wrong to back Brexit. They can say that Brexit was a vote to reject the Cameron, Clegg, Blair and Adonis approach of being mealy-mouthed about the EU and trying to have it both ways. Either we're in or we're out, but let's not have any half measures.

Why would they wish to do that?

Because support for Brexit is unsustainable and it's the best way of reframing the question to save face.

A very large majority of people of people on the same part of the political spectrum as Boris and Farage are quite happy with Brexit.

TheScreamingEagles

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

England is a ceremonial country?

Tell that to the 80,000 England fans that will be going to Twickenham very soon.

Same as Essex county cricket fans in political terms, in fact even less so as Essex has its own council and England does not have its own parliament

Essex has never won the world cup, England has.

We beat nations with actual parliaments.

Brom

Scott_P said:

Brom said:

This margin of error tracker just isn't moving quickly enough. To force another referendum before March 2019 surely Remain needed to be polling consistent 10 point leads by now across all pollsters, but they're not coming close with any pollster at this moment in time despite banging on the door across the media. You only have to go on twitter to sense the panic from your AC Grayling sorts (Scott P take note!) as it sinks in that this won't be reversed.

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/952274557087440897

I don't have the heart to tell him Matthew Parris isn't PM. Can someone do it for me please?

tlg86

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

England is a ceremonial country?

Tell that to the 80,000 England fans that will be going to Twickenham very soon.

Same as Essex county cricket fans in political terms, in fact even less so as Essex has its own council and England does not have its own parliament

But England does have a permanent seat on IFAB.

Brom

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Brom said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

They don't even need to say they were wrong to back Brexit. They can say that Brexit was a vote to reject the Cameron, Clegg, Blair and Adonis approach of being mealy-mouthed about the EU and trying to have it both ways. Either we're in or we're out, but let's not have any half measures.

Why would they wish to do that?

Because support for Brexit is unsustainable and it's the best way of reframing the question to save face.

The polls suggest its rather sustainable otherwise remain would have a decent lead. We're heading towards injury time, remain have used all their subs and need to produce something they haven't shown in the previous 90 minutes.

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

England is a ceremonial country?

Tell that to the 80,000 England fans that will be going to Twickenham very soon.

Same as Essex county cricket fans in political terms, in fact even less so as Essex has its own council and England does not have its own parliament

Essex has never won the world cup, England has.

We beat nations with actual parliaments.

So what, it only won it as a ceremonial country and in the Olympics it competes as part of the UK

murali_s

Scott_P said:

Brom said:

This margin of error tracker just isn't moving quickly enough. To force another referendum before March 2019 surely Remain needed to be polling consistent 10 point leads by now across all pollsters, but they're not coming close with any pollster at this moment in time despite banging on the door across the media. You only have to go on twitter to sense the panic from your AC Grayling sorts (Scott P take note!) as it sinks in that this won't be reversed.

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/952274557087440897

Common sense surely, though lets face it, hardcore Leavers have zero common sense.

TheScreamingEagles

HYUFD said:

So what, it only won it as a ceremonial country and in the Olympics it competes as part of the UK

No it doesn't, it competes as part of (Team) Great Britain in the Olympics.

Scott_P

Brom said:

I don't have the heart to tell him Matthew Parris isn't PM. Can someone do it for me please?

Is there anyone doing a better job of sabotaging Brexit than TMay?

HYUFD

tlg86 said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

kle4 said:

williamglenn said:

stevef said:

tlg86 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

In which Leave supporters once again fail to ponder the implications of the country being divided indefinitely over the merits of Brexit. The country looks set to be unable ever to unite behind their pet hobbyhorse project. Not exactly promising for it to be a success.

You think we'd be united if Remain had won 52-48? I admit, the press would not have given disgruntled leavers as much coverage as they've given disgruntled remainers. But that wouldn't change the fact that the country was split nearly 50-50.

An astonishing statement, oblivious of its own irony. For decades Remainers pursued their project of a federal united superstate, ignoring the wishes and fears of millions of people regarding open borders and British laws being overidden by those of the EU. And to this day they argue that the British people should nbever have been consulted in the referendum, that it was simply none of the British people's business whether Britain remained a sovereign and independent country. And then they accuse Leavers of divisiveness.
If you believe in unity, then unite behind the democratic vote in the referendum of 2016 and stop trying to thwart democracy.

If Britain is a sovereign and independent country, why does Arlene Foster have a veto over the most consequential policy it is pursuing?

She's a party leader of a UK political party, and her having influence in this country is therefore not harming sovereignty in the slightest? Genuinely confused by your point. I know you don't want NI to be part of the country, but it still is.

The point is simply that the UK is not the same entity as Britain and that the question of the sovereignty of either of them, not to mention England, is not straightforward.

Only the UK is a sovereign country in political terms, Britain is just a geographical entity, England just a ceremonial country

England is a ceremonial country?

Tell that to the 80,000 England fans that will be going to Twickenham very soon.

Same as Essex county cricket fans in political terms, in fact even less so as Essex has its own council and England does not have its own parliament

But England does have a permanent seat on IFAB.

As a ceremonial country

Brom

murali_s said:

Scott_P said:

Brom said:

This margin of error tracker just isn't moving quickly enough. To force another referendum before March 2019 surely Remain needed to be polling consistent 10 point leads by now across all pollsters, but they're not coming close with any pollster at this moment in time despite banging on the door across the media. You only have to go on twitter to sense the panic from your AC Grayling sorts (Scott P take note!) as it sinks in that this won't be reversed.

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/952274557087440897

Common sense surely, though lets face it, hardcore Leavers have zero common sense.

Love the fact last year Brexit wasn't happening, now the best the extreme remoaners have is "err actually it might be a soft brexit"

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

HYUFD said:

So what, it only won it as a ceremonial country and in the Olympics it competes as part of the UK

No it doesn't, it competes as part of (Team) Great Britain in the Olympics.

No the team is the UK team of GB and NI, 'team GB' was just adopted as it was snappier to say

williamglenn

Brom said:

williamglenn said:

Sean_F said:

williamglenn said:

Brom said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

williamglenn said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic this figure will be interesting once the Brexit deal is fleshed out, right now it is just noise.

Although with UKIP using thing kind of language/rhetoric who knows what's going on.

Farage is already positioning to make the same kind of switch that Marine Le Pen made in her rhetoric on the EU. Anti-EU politics will end up being akin to anti-Washington politics in the US, where secessionism is very much a fringe pursuit. I seriously expect some unlikely voices to end up saying that we'd be better off going all the way in than accepting "May's vassal state deal".

Just look under that tweet and some Kippers/Leavers think Farage is going to back Remain soon.

That's probably what it will take. If a big hitter like Farage or Boris say they were wrong to back Brexit then it really is game on. Perhaps Dave should have left Warsi and Wollaston as sleeper cells 'backing' leave

They don't even need to say they were wrong to back Brexit. They can say that Brexit was a vote to reject the Cameron, Clegg, Blair and Adonis approach of being mealy-mouthed about the EU and trying to have it both ways. Either we're in or we're out, but let's not have any half measures.

Why would they wish to do that?

Because support for Brexit is unsustainable and it's the best way of reframing the question to save face.

The polls suggest its rather sustainable otherwise remain would have a decent lead. We're heading towards injury time, remain have used all their subs and need to produce something they haven't shown in the previous 90 minutes.

The whistle for half-time was blown when sufficient progress was reached. We'll see how play takes shape in the second half once May's cabinet has agreed a position on the final state.

TheScreamingEagles

Which is the only country to have won both the Rugby Union and Association Football World Cups?

Answer: A ceremonial country apparently.

Brom

Scott_P said:

Brom said:

I don't have the heart to tell him Matthew Parris isn't PM. Can someone do it for me please?

Is there anyone doing a better job of sabotaging Brexit than TMay?

well she is a remainer after all. But I'm sure we can both agree Clegg, Blair and Adonis have done an even better job of ending our EU membership. You'd think nearly 18 months on lessons would have been learned. Either way I'm glad you're accepting a soft brexit, I'll take that too.