It would be a good position for a Tory leader. I think there is a zero chance of Johnson or Mogg becoming Tory leader. The Tories will skip a generation in those circumstances.
Zero?
While I'm betting against the Mogg-ster (and Johnson too), there are credible paths to the leadership for both of them.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
The key in 2005 was the LDs got 22% of the vote, Blair held the centre and won a comfortable majority of seats in England it was just he lost a number of leftwingers to the LDs while still holding most Labour marginals.
Now the left is united behind Corbyn but even if he becones PM it will likely be with SNP support, the Tories will probably win a majority of seats in England. For example May had a majority of 60 seats in England in 2017 and Blair had a majority of 43 seats in England in 2005
1). Governments almost always get a higher percentage of the vote in real d go stronger in opposition for 1 year or two until the government collapsed before returning a la Thatcher at the subsequent election. Any Corbynista who rejoices at that must be bonkers.
A Corbyn government propped up by the SNP and LDs with the Tories having won most seats would certainly not be a bad position for a Tory Leader of the Opposition Boris or Jacob Rees Mogg to be in
I doubt the LDs would prop up a Corbyn government: it would be electoral suicide in South West London, Eastbourne, Bath.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
In England? Are you sure?
EDIT: Yes you're right, my mistake.
The 2010 boundaries were mostly drawn up between 2000 and 2003, which might be the reason for your mistake. The Blair government stonewalled to prevent them coming into force in the 2005 election, much as Wilson had done in 1970, though they did allow the newly drawn Scottish boundaries to come into force that year.
Is it possible to read anything into shifts in the make-up of the unweighted YouGov panel? Previously there was quite a big bias towards people who voted Remain in 2016 which was corrected in the weightings, but in the latest poll there's almost no adjustment as the panel contains a lot more 2016 Leave voters to begin with.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
In England? Are you sure?
EDIT: Yes you're right, my mistake.
The 2010 boundaries were mostly drawn up between 2000 and 2003, which might be the reason for your mistake. The Blair government stonewalled to prevent them coming into force in the 2005 election, much as Wilson had done in 1970, though they did allow the newly drawn Scottish boundaries to come into force that year.
Yes that's what led to my confusion, I was thinking about how the current boundaries were drawn up then.
"The European Commission was forced to apologise to diplomats from the remaining 27 EU member countries for the “inappropriate wording” of the Brexit punishment clause, amid fears it could trigger a British walkout from negotiations."
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
In England? Are you sure?
EDIT: Yes you're right, my mistake.
The 2010 boundaries were mostly drawn up between 2000 and 2003, which might be the reason for your mistake. The Blair government stonewalled to prevent them coming into force in the 2005 election, much as Wilson had done in 1970, though they did allow the newly drawn Scottish boundaries to come into force that year.
Yes that's what led to my confusion, I was thinking about how the current boundaries were drawn up then.
And do you know what the result in seats would have been in 2005, if the Blair government had allowed the new boundaries then?
Is it possible to read anything into shifts in the make-up of the unweighted YouGov panel? Previously there was quite a big bias towards people who voted Remain in 2016 which was corrected in the weightings, but in the latest poll there's almost no adjustment as the panel contains a lot more 2016 Leave voters to begin with.
It might be because response rates are up from some voters, or it might be that YouGov are targeting their survey invitations differently.
I'm sure it tells YouGov a lot, but without the other information they have it tells us nothing.
OT: Mr Meeks is missing some important information, firstly, we in Scotland can read news papers, watch tv news, listen to the radio and even, dare I say it? I must, I must! Use computers to get information. Needless to say, we have not been impressed with the quality of intellectual rigour and competence from our betters in government at the Palace of Westminster. And this is after 40 odd years of European Union, we can well imagine the mess they would make trying to disentangle 300 years of United Kingdom. Any attempt by the SNP to run iRef2 will cause major ructions, in and outside the party.
Secondly, the SNP have major internal problems that they are desperately trying to divert attention from. A senior SNP MSP caught up in a sex scandal and having to resign, while a SNP councillor in Edinburgh is also under pressure to resign for misbehaviour, then there are the SNP councils and constituency parties who are not towing the party line. Or the number of senior members who have not put their names forward for the Deputy Leaders position, as they suspect they will actually be third in the pecking order after Peter Murrell (aka Mr Sturgeon). Then there is the potential probability, that Alex Salmond will try and return to Holyrood "to save the nation again" and the SNP in a subsequent constituency by election. Win or lose, would be disastrous, to stop him standing would split the party.
There is also the question of what would happen if Nicola fell under the proverbial bus (or Edinburgh Tram). Most of the present inner circle are only there through personal friendship or allegiance to the Sturgeons (Mrs and Mr) rather than any record of competence or ability. This is causing a sense of annoyance within the backbenchers in Westminster, Holyrood in the local councils and constituency parties. The other parties in Scotland are looking on with some amusement as Nicola and her famed 30 plus media team desperately struggle to keep the opening cracks papered over, or mentions that the party coffers are not as full as they would like.
He quotes a projection from Electoral Calculus that the Tories would be ahead by a single seat. That is so far inside the margin of error for any projection that absolutely nothing is confirmed. Seat projectors aren't accurate to within a single seat margin.
It does show how a narrow Labour popular vote lead can still leave the Tories ahead on seats but either way as I said the outcome would still likely be Corbyn PM with SNP confidence and supply
Can lead to it yes.
However if votes pile up in seats slightly differently then a narrow Tory popular vote lead can still lead to Labour being ahead on seats as has happened in previous elections on the existing boundaries, notably within England in 2005. In 2005 in England the Tories won the popular vote yet Labour won 92 seats more than the Tories. We're still operating on the same boundaries and uniform national swing isn't real.
That is incorrect, the boundaries were different in 2005, we are now using boundaries which came in to force in 2010.
In England? Are you sure?
EDIT: Yes you're right, my mistake.
The 2010 boundaries were mostly drawn up between 2000 and 2003, which might be the reason for your mistake. The Blair government stonewalled to prevent them coming into force in the 2005 election, much as Wilson had done in 1970, though they did allow the newly drawn Scottish boundaries to come into force that year.
Yes that's what led to my confusion, I was thinking about how the current boundaries were drawn up then.
And do you know what the result in seats would have been in 2005, if the Blair government had allowed the new boundaries then?
No idea. Do you know?
Thinking back to 2010 I recall now all the talk about "notional" seats and I seem to recall Labour would still have had a "notional" seat lead despite being behind in the popular vote. May be wrong though.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
Yet if referendum were won solely on economic sense then Remain would have won a landslide.
are much more compelling now than they were then.
However the pensioners that panicked on that topic at the behest of the great clunking fist are diminishing rapidly.
Of course, the UK economy rebalanced during the early 1990s recession, moving from trade and current account deficits to surpluses, and seeing the savings rate spike to 15%.
Right now, our saving rate is below even the depths it reached prior to the 2008 financial crisis.
OT: Mr Meeks is missing some important information, firstly, we in Scotland can read news papers, watch tv news, listen to the radio and even, dare I say it? I must, I must! Use computers to get information. Needless to say, we have not been impressed with the quality of intellectual rigour and competence from our betters in government at the Palace of Westminster. And this is after 40 odd years of European Union, we can well imagine the mess they would make trying to disentangle 300 years of United Kingdom. Any attempt by the SNP to run iRef2 will cause major ructions, in and outside the party.
Secondly, the SNP have major internal problems that they are desperately trying to divert attention from. A senior SNP MSP caught up in a sex scandal and having to resign, while a SNP councillor in Edinburgh is also under pressure to resign for misbehaviour, then there are the SNP councils and constituency parties who are not towing the party line. Or the number of senior members who have not put their names forward for the Deputy Leaders position, as they suspect they will actually be third in the pecking order after Peter Murrell (aka Mr Sturgeon). Then there is the potential probability, that Alex Salmond will try and return to Holyrood "to save the nation again" and the SNP in a subsequent constituency by election. Win or lose, would be disastrous, to stop him standing would split the party.
There is also the question of what would happen if Nicola fell under the proverbial bus (or Edinburgh Tram). Most of the present inner circle are only there through personal friendship or allegiance to the Sturgeons (Mrs and Mr) rather than any record of competence or ability. This is causing a sense of annoyance within the backbenchers in Westminster, Holyrood in the local councils and constituency parties. The other parties in Scotland are looking on with some amusement as Nicola and her famed 30 plus media team desperately struggle to keep the opening cracks papered over, or mentions that the party coffers are not as full as they would like.
Brexit begeting Scottish Independence was one of the primary reasons I backed Remain.
Well you were wrong. Brexit actually makes Scottish independence far more complicated. Whatever one thought about the fantasy that a newly independent Scotland automatically becoming a member of the EU the fact is that the 2014 referendum took place with the UK in the Single Market. If the UK leaves the SM, as is likely Scotland has a choice. Either we remain in a Single Market with rUK, by far our biggest customer, or we go into a SM with the EU, a relatively modest market.
Only 1 of these solutions has any economic sense. If we remain in a SM with rUK, with the same currency, interest rates, monetary policy and, possibly, freedom of movement someone will have to explain to the majority of Scots why that would be worth the effort. It sure doesn't look like independence to me.
Yet if referendum were won solely on economic sense then Remain would have won a landslide.
are much more compelling now than they were then.
However the pensioners that panicked on that topic at the behest of the great clunking fist are diminishing rapidly.
LOL, we are all getting older Malcolm.
David, scary thing is I am perilously close to it.
Agreed. I think they might abstain on a Queen's Speech.
I agree - although a Queen's Speech is not what it was when losing one was effectively a confidence issue, so even if the non-Lab parties combined to vote against a Corbyn QS, they wouldn't necessarily bring down the government.
Of course, the UK economy rebalanced during the early 1990s recession, moving from trade and current account deficits to surpluses, and seeing the savings rate spike to 15%.
Right now, our saving rate is below even the depths it reached prior to the 2008 financial crisis.
Not really a surprise given how long interest rates have been on the floor. We are not Japan...
OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.
It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.
To repeat a post of some moons ago:
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
The last step is where you go wrong.
There were terrorists. They got into organised crime to fund their activities. After a while they stopped killing people and focused on making money
This creates an opportunity to make more money. It doesn’t follow that people will start killing each other again
OK. So not really a soft border at all. The one thing we can be nearly sure of is that the Irish border will be a major smuggling route. It's almost cultural.
It is at the moment. As I've repeatedly pointed out, and been ignored every time, it's currently illegal to smuggle booze'n'fags across and sell them, but not a single person claims that therefore you have to have a hard border. No doubt the booze'n'fags smuggling will continue if the current huge excise duty differences persist, but that's got absolutely nothing to do with Brexit. Are we seriously suggesting that the integrity of the Single Market might be at risk from criminal gangs importing Malaysian car parts into NI, shipping them to Dun Laoghaire, and sneaking them over to Rotterdam for onward shipping to the BMW factory in Munich, all without anyone noticing? The concerns are bordering on bonkers, or more likely are just Remainers trying to create artificial difficulties to support their preconceptions.
You are having a momentary lapse of logic informed perhaps by only a vague understanding of the past 50-odd years of life on the island of Ireland.
To repeat a post of some moons ago:
Different tariff environment = opportunity to benefit by smuggling from one to the other
Opportunity to smuggle = criminal activity
Criminal activity = potential for undesirable groups to participate
Potential for undesirable groups to participate = 1970s
1970s = Troubles.
Now, you may say that it's all low grade stuff (booze 'n' fags) but the more opportunities there are to make money, the more they will be exploited.
The last step is where you go wrong.
There were terrorists. They got into organised crime to fund their activities. After a while they stopped killing people and focused on making money
This creates an opportunity to make more money. It doesn’t follow that people will start killing each other again
Nope.
They carried on killing people for a very long time. Certainly beyond the GFA. And even up until this morning.
As with @Richard_Nabavi you are intellectualising from a distance the situation in NI. Or do you really think that the legacy of 1916 evaporated with increased wealth in the country.
Mr. 09, that's interesting. I can see why customs hold-ups, or fear of such, make larger firms and exporting firms wary. We tend to hear less of businesses that are in favour of leaving, and the reasons thereof.
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
It can be interpreted in multiple ways. My view has always been that the UK inside the EU, but outside the EZ is bad all round. With our population, we could swing a blocking minority against the EZ countries. With us outside, the EZ countries can get on with the necessary EMU.
From that broader perspective, the UK should be either all the way in, or all the way out. I'll let William fill in the blanks.
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
I don't read it as necessarily being automatically great for Labour. DKs will sleep to whoever runs the better campaign I think, and in 2017 that certainly wasn't the Tories ..
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
Yes, of course. You are completely correct. The UK will become a land of milk and honey and golden sunshine.
Mr. Pulpstar, the atrociousness of the Conservative campaign does make reading things a bit tricky. It was some next level bullshit. An epic epoch of effluence.
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
Yes, of course. You are completely correct. The UK will become a land of milk and honey and golden sunshine.
I don't think he was suggesting that, merely that it won't be as bad as some doomsayers have predicted.
This was all about in the 2017 campaign. The only people who care are those who are never going to vote Labour anyway though, of at least there aren't many of them.
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
Yes, of course. You are completely correct. The UK will become a land of milk and honey and golden sunshine.
I don't think he was suggesting that, merely that it won't be as bad as some doomsayers have predicted.
I hope he is right. I really do.
What if he is not? It is one hell of a gamble and it is quite clear that no one has the first clue about how it will turn out. That is what annoys me. It is all such a bl**dy stupid risk with little upside and a potentially huge downside.
Mrs C, just curious as to your views on Cameron's role in the referendum. Do you regret that he was unable to win it, lambast him for calling it in the first place, blame the EU/Cameron for the failed renegotiation etc?
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
Yes, of course. You are completely correct. The UK will become a land of milk and honey and golden sunshine.
I don't think he was suggesting that, merely that it won't be as bad as some doomsayers have predicted.
Project Fear rhetoric aside, where do you get these doomsayers' forecasts from.
AFAICS most sensible forecasts are for a few percentage points diminution in growth over the next few years or so.
Nothing that will bring doom to the country.
Now of course, a few percentage points foregone growth means billions of pounds not achieved which will likely affect those who need it most (a billion here, a billion there, etc...) but nothing for most to worry about and almost certainly nothing to affect 99% of PB Leavers, for example, who I would place in the upper decile of the country's population by wealth (those, of course, who haven't fucked off to live somewhere else, that is).
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
Yes, of course. You are completely correct. The UK will become a land of milk and honey and golden sunshine.
I don't think he was suggesting that, merely that it won't be as bad as some doomsayers have predicted.
Project Fear rhetoric aside, where do you get these doomsayers' forecasts from.
AFAICS most sensible forecasts are for a few percentage points diminution in growth over the next few years or so.
Nothing that will bring doom to the country.
Now of course, a few percentage points foregone growth means billions of pounds not achieved which will likely affect those who need it most (a billion here, a billion there, etc...) but nothing for most to worry about and almost certainly nothing to affect 99% of PB Leavers, for example, who I would place in the upper decile of the country's population by wealth (those, of course, who haven't fucked off to live somewhere else, that is).
I'm glad we agree that the Treasury forecast wasn't sensible
Interestingly, this is a survey of EU business people.
I am not surprised. They stand to get a lot of business that is currently done in the UK. Besides, given our display of world-beating ineptness, indecision and dither, I am not surprised that they are thinking that they are better off rid of us. Our current behaviour can hardly install confidence.
You do realise that the 53% was for UK business leaders?
No I do not. I took RCS1000's comment that is was an EU survey at face value.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Why doesn't it? It shows that the people that know best are better informed than the doom-mongering Chicken Licken's who are repeating the mantra that the UK is doomed to fail if we leave the ERM / don't join the Euro when it's launched / rule out joining the Euro soon / hold an EU referendum / immediately after voting leave / invoke Article 50 / when we do leave.
Yes, of course. You are completely correct. The UK will become a land of milk and honey and golden sunshine.
I don't think he was suggesting that, merely that it won't be as bad as some doomsayers have predicted.
Project Fear rhetoric aside, where do you get these doomsayers' forecasts from?
AFAICS most sensible forecasts are for a few percentage points diminution in growth over the next few years or so.
Nothing that will bring doom to the country.
Now of course, a few percentage points foregone growth means billions of pounds not achieved which will likely affect those who need it most (a billion here, a billion there, etc...) but nothing for most to worry about and almost certainly nothing to affect 99% of PB Leavers, for example, who I would place in the upper decile of the country's population by wealth (those, of course, who haven't fucked off to live somewhere else, that is).
Mrs C, just curious as to your views on Cameron's role in the referendum. Do you regret that he was unable to win it, lambast him for calling it in the first place, blame the EU/Cameron for the failed renegotiation etc?
I blame Cameron for his stupid complacency. He does not seem to have considered that he could lose. He did not allow studies of the outcome of losing - "There is no Plan B" - it all just seemed to be something that he expected would blow over with no trouble.
He clearly learned nothing from Sindyref which was won with an unspectacular margin and which, for quite a while, looked like it was going the other way.
Now of course, a few percentage points foregone growth means billions of pounds not achieved which will likely affect those who need it most (a billion here, a billion there, etc...) but nothing for most to worry about and almost certainly nothing to affect 99% of PB Leavers, for example, who I would place in the upper decile of the country's population by wealth (those, of course, who haven't fucked off to live somewhere else, that is).
I'm sorry? You are telling me not to worry because it will be unlikely to affect people as bright or well-off as PB posters?
Are you for real?
Do not bother responding. You have just blown my mind for the day and I am going to wander off and do other stuff.
OT: Mr Meeks is missing some important information, firstly, we in Scotland can read news papers, watch tv news, listen to the radio and even, dare I say it? I must, I must! Use computers to get information. Needless to say, we have not been impressed with the quality of intellectual rigour and competence from our betters in government at the Palace of Westminster. And this is after 40 odd years of European Union, we can well imagine the mess they would make trying to disentangle 300 years of United Kingdom. Any attempt by the SNP to run iRef2 will cause major ructions, in and outside the party.
Secondly, the SNP have major internal problems that they are desperately trying to divert attention from. A senior SNP MSP caught up in a sex scandal and having to resign, while a SNP councillor in Edinburgh is also under pressure to resign for misbehaviour, then there are the SNP councils and constituency parties who are not towing the party line. Or the number of senior members who have not put their names forward for the Deputy Leaders position, as they suspect they will actually be third in the pecking order after Peter Murrell (aka Mr Sturgeon). Then there is the potential probability, that Alex Salmond will try and return to Holyrood "to save the nation again" and the SNP in a subsequent constituency by election. Win or lose, would be disastrous, to stop him standing would split the party.
There is also the question of what would happen if Nicola fell under the proverbial bus (or Edinburgh Tram). Most of the present inner circle are only there through personal friendship or allegiance to the Sturgeons (Mrs and Mr) rather than any record of competence or ability. This is causing a sense of annoyance within the backbenchers in Westminster, Holyrood in the local councils and constituency parties. The other parties in Scotland are looking on with some amusement as Nicola and her famed 30 plus media team desperately struggle to keep the opening cracks papered over, or mentions that the party coffers are not as full as they would like.
Comments
While I'm betting against the Mogg-ster (and Johnson too), there are credible paths to the leadership for both of them.
Remoamerspeak: translation: we predicted during operation ProjectFear that a vote for Leave would lead to Scottish independence.
And we were totally, embarrassingly, mind numbingly and excrutiatingly WRONG1
Well perhaps you can factor in half term - Conservative supporting toffs away skiing, lefty teachers at home available to do online polling
But no.
"The European Commission was forced to apologise to diplomats from the remaining 27 EU member countries for the “inappropriate wording” of the Brexit punishment clause, amid fears it could trigger a British walkout from negotiations."
I'm sure it tells YouGov a lot, but without the other information they have it tells us nothing.
Secondly, the SNP have major internal problems that they are desperately trying to divert attention from. A senior SNP MSP caught up in a sex scandal and having to resign, while a SNP councillor in Edinburgh is also under pressure to resign for misbehaviour, then there are the SNP councils and constituency parties who are not towing the party line. Or the number of senior members who have not put their names forward for the Deputy Leaders position, as they suspect they will actually be third in the pecking order after Peter Murrell (aka Mr Sturgeon). Then there is the potential probability, that Alex Salmond will try and return to Holyrood "to save the nation again" and the SNP in a subsequent constituency by election. Win or lose, would be disastrous, to stop him standing would split the party.
There is also the question of what would happen if Nicola fell under the proverbial bus (or Edinburgh Tram). Most of the present inner circle are only there through personal friendship or allegiance to the Sturgeons (Mrs and Mr) rather than any record of competence or ability. This is causing a sense of annoyance within the backbenchers in Westminster, Holyrood in the local councils and constituency parties. The other parties in Scotland are looking on with some amusement as Nicola and her famed 30 plus media team desperately struggle to keep the opening cracks papered over, or mentions that the party coffers are not as full as they would like.
Thinking back to 2010 I recall now all the talk about "notional" seats and I seem to recall Labour would still have had a "notional" seat lead despite being behind in the popular vote. May be wrong though.
Of course, the UK economy rebalanced during the early 1990s recession, moving from trade and current account deficits to surpluses, and seeing the savings rate spike to 15%.
Right now, our saving rate is below even the depths it reached prior to the 2008 financial crisis.
In any event, this is excellent trolling of the present White House incumbent by Mr. Romney.
We are not Japan...
I trust you've all been playing nicely?
There were terrorists. They got into organised crime to fund their activities. After a while they stopped killing people and focused on making money
This creates an opportunity to make more money. It doesn’t follow that people will start killing each other again
They carried on killing people for a very long time. Certainly beyond the GFA. And even up until this morning.
As with @Richard_Nabavi you are intellectualising from a distance the situation in NI. Or do you really think that the legacy of 1916 evaporated with increased wealth in the country.
Even so, for our business leaders to think that leaving the EU is best for the EU does not exactly sing British praises, does it?
Well done Brexiteers! We are offically damaged goods......
:rollseyes:
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/964493851724574720
From that broader perspective, the UK should be either all the way in, or all the way out. I'll let William fill in the blanks.
https://twitter.com/AlexWardVox/status/964523438873473025
https://twitter.com/AmandeepBhogal/status/964401631277105154
What if he is not? It is one hell of a gamble and it is quite clear that no one has the first clue about how it will turn out. That is what annoys me. It is all such a bl**dy stupid risk with little upside and a potentially huge downside.
AFAICS most sensible forecasts are for a few percentage points diminution in growth over the next few years or so.
Nothing that will bring doom to the country.
Now of course, a few percentage points foregone growth means billions of pounds not achieved which will likely affect those who need it most (a billion here, a billion there, etc...) but nothing for most to worry about and almost certainly nothing to affect 99% of PB Leavers, for example, who I would place in the upper decile of the country's population by wealth (those, of course, who haven't fucked off to live somewhere else, that is).
AFAICS most sensible forecasts are for a few percentage points diminution in growth over the next few years or so.
Nothing that will bring doom to the country.
Now of course, a few percentage points foregone growth means billions of pounds not achieved which will likely affect those who need it most (a billion here, a billion there, etc...) but nothing for most to worry about and almost certainly nothing to affect 99% of PB Leavers, for example, who I would place in the upper decile of the country's population by wealth (those, of course, who haven't fucked off to live somewhere else, that is).
He clearly learned nothing from Sindyref which was won with an unspectacular margin and which, for quite a while, looked like it was going the other way.
Are you for real?
Do not bother responding. You have just blown my mind for the day and I am going to wander off and do other stuff.