Ken Clarke once said he wanted Westminster to effectively become a local council.
I wish somebody would produce a full source for that quote because I don't believe that has ever been an accurate reflection of Ken Clarke's views.
According to the internet, the quote is from International Currency Review, Vol. 23, No. 4, Autumn 1996 - "I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a Council Chamber in Europe"
Rightly, they just remember all the stuff about Turkey and the bus.
Leavers have to accept the nature of the mandate they secured - insular, xenophobic and dishonest. That much has to be delivered. Everything else is up for grabs.
Or that the NHS and Immigration are frequently at, or near the top of voters concerns? Of course people remember things they are interested in.
And so, of course, if you are correct, people are uninterested in the customs union and it is in no way dishonouring the referendum if the ultimate settlement goes either way on the point.
Mr. Glenn, there is no case for a second referendum, as it would give a massive incentive to pro-EU politicians to try and get us the worst possible deal upon leaving so we 'see the error of our ways' and stay in.
You silly sausage.
There is a potential moral hazard to a second referendum yes. But there is a strong democratic case for it, and indeed the moral hazard disappears once negotiation has concluded.
Mr. Meeks, you argued people never mentioned leaving the customs union. Now, after I showed you footage of various people mentioning just that, you're changing your argument.
Most people can't recall the 2012 Spanish qualifying controversy. I can, because I happened to get lucky (Hamilton was fastest but got disqualified and I was able to back Maldonado and Alonso, starting 1-2, at about 6 each to lead lap 1). The fact other people can't remember doesn't alter what happened.
Leaving the customs union was raised many times. Doing our own trade deals was mentioned many times. Pretending otherwise is to just claim things that did happen did not, because they're inconvenient for you.
Xenophobia and dishonesty does remind me of that Polish chap that was killed by a mixed race gang, which was attributed by some people to the 'xenophobia' stirred up by the vote [oddly, this hasn't stopped the vast majority being aghast at the Windrush scandal...]. Still, when you put your "racist-tinted glasses" on, I suppose it's easy to see hatred for foreigners where it doesn't exist.
It's why only the hardcore Remainers mention the empire. It soothes them to think that racism, backwardness, a silly nostalgia is behind the vote to leave. It wasn't made by thinking people, as clever as them, but by foolish types far away from London, yearning for a bygone age. They couldn't possibly have rejected the EU, could they?
So, they bang on and on and on about xenophobia, and empire, and drown out almost everything else, and then claim the xenophobia was the reason why Leave won. If your side had spent some time promoting the advantages of the EU (and there are some advantages, though I feel they're outweighed by the disadvantages, and that balance would only worsen) instead of pointing at the electorate and proclaiming them racist for even thinking of voting the same way as Farage, you would've won.
All you had to do was make an argument. Instead, there was just noise. And you lost.
Anyway, I am moderately pestilent, so I'm going to bugger off now.
Perhaps we need some kind of fake news watchdog to actively counter the worst excesses through rebuttal if not the pursuit of defamation cases. Certainly we need to take action against Russian trolls.
BTW, FPT:
I did, in fact live in Garden Walk as a footloose bachelor (and before that, on Old Street above a wine shop).
Subsequently bought a flat in Clerkenwell and then, as family started to grow, moved all the way out to London Fields.
But yes. We must surely have crossed paths. In fact, I just had lunch at Lantana (which I presume is almost underneath your abode!)
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I would not have us create an arbiter of truth, a Ministry, if you will.
It may well be the thin edge of the wedge, but we live in a different world. I was thinking of something relatively instructional rather than prosecutorial though: like a fact checker.
Jimmy Wales has set up a beta site to do for news what wikipedia has done for facts.
It aims to produce truthful news that is peer reviewed.
My first impression, I am ashamed to say, is that I find it boring. I'm ashamed because I've discovered that I much prefer partisan pieces that I can vigorously agree with or passionately disagree with, than the boring truth!
I always rather enjoyed reading the sub-reddit. There is something about a level of self-delusion that is rather fascinating - like one of Louis Theroux's programmes.
Sexual frustration sure seems to be behind some atrocious behaviour.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
Ken Clarke once said he wanted Westminster to effectively become a local council.
I wish somebody would produce a full source for that quote because I don't believe that has ever been an accurate reflection of Ken Clarke's views.
According to the internet, the quote is from International Currency Review, Vol. 23, No. 4, Autumn 1996 - "I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a Council Chamber in Europe"
At the time he was Chancellor heading into a General Election?
' What can we do to combat this? In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context. '
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
More cobblers from the Brexitfundamentalists - show me the ballot paper that talked about the Customs Union. In simple English, put up or shut up.
If cyclefree's definition of racism/anti-Semitism is as she says and apparently internationally accepted "A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" then the article above in Haaretz would have the boys in blue buzzing like bees and Bolton would be being read his rights...
'John Bolton was chairman of an anti Muslim thinktank that falsely claimed a looming jihadist takeover of Europe leading to a "Great White Death"
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
Mr. Meeks, you argued people never mentioned leaving the customs union. Now, after I showed you footage of various people mentioning just that, you're changing your argument.
No I'm not. My argument is short and sweet. Leave based its campaign on xenophobia and the NHS fake pledge. That's all that's remembered now.
Of course Vote Leave produced a load of other stuff. I have no doubt that you can find a Vote Leave policy on basket-weaving if you dig deep enough. But it wouldn't form part of the mandate because that wasn't what Vote Leave chose to make the campaign about.
The referendum having been won on xenophobic lies, that (and more money for the NHS) is all that has to be delivered.
' What can we do to combat this? In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context. '
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Ken Clarke once said he wanted Westminster to effectively become a local council.
I wish somebody would produce a full source for that quote because I don't believe that has ever been an accurate reflection of Ken Clarke's views.
According to the internet, the quote is from International Currency Review, Vol. 23, No. 4, Autumn 1996 - "I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a Council Chamber in Europe"
At the time he was Chancellor heading into a General Election?
The internet doesn’t have a direct quote (I think), just repetition of the claim that he made the quote.
Someone will need to logon to the university library and see if they can find it in the original. Even if the words are accurately cited, it’s possible we are missing context.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
That racism and xenophobia is all the public remember. Your leaflets were a waste of good trees: no one read them, no one remembers them, no one bar a few fruitloops cares about them.
If it had been a key reason, that, rather than vile posters terrifying the public that hordes of Turks were arriving, would have been plastered over every bus stop in the land.
' What can we do to combat this? In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context. '
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Did you check the primary source ie the ONS agricultural jobs or were you guilty of wishful thinking and failed to 'scrutinise carefully a story that confirms your prejudices' ?
' What can we do to combat this? In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context. '
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Did you check the primary source ie the ONS agricultural jobs or were you guilty of wishful thinking and failed to 'scrutinise carefully a story that confirms your prejudices' ?
You seem to think the claims are inconsistent. You have made a claim I haven't commented on, but you have dismissed a claim that I have made for which on different occasions I have provided a good deal of evidence.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
So here we are.
What exactly would you suggest was promised by Vote Leave that was incompatible with leaving the Customs Union?
If cyclefree's definition of racism/anti-Semitism is as she says and apparently internationally accepted "A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" then the article above in Haaretz would have the boys in blue buzzing like bees and Bolton would be being read his rights...
'John Bolton was chairman of an anti Muslim thinktank that falsely claimed a looming jihadist takeover of Europe leading to a "Great White Death"
Dear Roger: try reading more carefully. I quoted the definition of racism set out in the McPherson report which has been accepted by the police in the UK. I did not say that it had been accepted internationally.
An article - written by whom? - is not an incident. And the paper is doing its job by pointing out the false claims of the think tank.
Mr. Meeks, you argued people never mentioned leaving the customs union. Now, after I showed you footage of various people mentioning just that, you're changing your argument.
No I'm not. My argument is short and sweet. Leave based its campaign on xenophobia and the NHS fake pledge. That's all that's remembered now.
Of course Vote Leave produced a load of other stuff. I have no doubt that you can find a Vote Leave policy on basket-weaving if you dig deep enough. But it wouldn't form part of the mandate because that wasn't what Vote Leave chose to make the campaign about.
The referendum having been won on xenophobic lies, that (and more money for the NHS) is all that has to be delivered.
Ah, back in the realms of Mr Meeks' fantasies again.
Proven to have made a false statement he resorts to his tired old rubbish about xenophobia.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
So here we are.
What exactly would you suggest was promised by Vote Leave that was incompatible with leaving the Customs Union?
For example:
Boris Johnson: Brexit would not affect Irish border
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
So here we are.
What exactly would you suggest was promised by Vote Leave that was incompatible with leaving the Customs Union?
I think all summed up in the claim that Italian prosecco growers were not going to let us exit without a deal.
But seriously, the Vote Leave was all about cake and eating cake. There would be no problems, we were told, in Northern Ireland, for goods exporters, for supply chains, etc etc.
But turns out that - as with most of the Leave manifesto - it wasn’t true.
Of course, Leave wouldn’t have won if they’d said there were trade-offs.
Mr. Meeks, you argued people never mentioned leaving the customs union. Now, after I showed you footage of various people mentioning just that, you're changing your argument.
No I'm not. My argument is short and sweet. Leave based its campaign on xenophobia and the NHS fake pledge. That's all that's remembered now.
Of course Vote Leave produced a load of other stuff. I have no doubt that you can find a Vote Leave policy on basket-weaving if you dig deep enough. But it wouldn't form part of the mandate because that wasn't what Vote Leave chose to make the campaign about.
The referendum having been won on xenophobic lies, that (and more money for the NHS) is all that has to be delivered.
Ah, back in the realms of Mr Meeks' fantasies again.
Proven to have made a false statement he resorts to his tired old rubbish about xenophobia.
Wipe the spittle from your eyes. I have given abundant evidence for my claims. The Brexit crazies who are trying to spin moonbeams from cucumbers fail to realise just how uninterested the general public was in the customs union. Hardly surprising, as Vote Leave indulged in lace curtain racism to secure their victory.
Is there a word in English for a posh, articulate and plausible, but fundamentally dishonest, twat?
Cad?
Bounder, surely.
Yes. That’s it. I mean, it reeks of the 1930s, but perhaps that’s apposite.
Rees-Mogg is a bloody bounder.
I’ve only heard it used as part of a pair (“cad and bounder”): you can be a cad without being a bounder, but can you be a bounder without being a cad?
Edit: having just checked:
A cad is a man who behaves dishonourably
A bounder is a dishonourable man
That’s a very nice* distinction
* traditional usage
I had it explained to me that a bounder is the kind of man who'd lead a dangerous charge in battle, and then seduce his Colonel's wife when home on leave, whereas a cad is someone who'd steal the former's credit, and then seduce the Colonel's wife.
' What can we do to combat this? In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context. '
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Now lets examine this story in more details following Alastair's excellent advice:
' In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context.
Be especially sceptical of information that produces a strong emotional response from you. Ask yourself who wants to produce that response. '
This seems to be the key claim:
' James Orr, whose farm outside St Andrews produces potatoes, carrots, parsnips, broccoli, cauliflower, said his farm suffered a 15 per cent drop in the number of workers between August and November. '
Wow a 15% drop in workers between August and November - sounds like a lot. But how does that compare with the agricultural sector in general.
The ONS gives agricultural employment as
2017q3 459k 2017q4 453k
No 15% fall there, but lets compare those quarters with previous years:
2016q3 420k 2016q4 443k
2015q3 427k 2015q4 423k
A rise in the agricultural workforce.
So perhaps we might look for an alternative explanation as to why Farmer Orr's workforce has fallen - perhaps other farmers are providing better pay and conditions and so getting their crops harvested.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
So here we are.
What exactly would you suggest was promised by Vote Leave that was incompatible with leaving the Customs Union?
I think all summed up in the claim that Italian prosecco growers were not going to let us exit without a deal.
But seriously, the Vote Leave was all about cake and eating cake. There would be no problems, we were told, in Northern Ireland, for goods exporters, for supply chains, etc etc.
But turns out that - as with most of the Leave manifesto - it wasn’t true.
Of course, Leave wouldn’t have won if they’d said there were trade-offs.
To be fair, it wasn't Leave's jobs to point out that there would have to be trade-offs. It was our .... Remain's...... job to point out clearly that if A, then B would have to follow. WHY it wasn't going to be gold plated unicorns.
And to do so in terms which would have been understood.
To be fair, it wasn't Leave's jobs to point out that there would have to be trade-offs. It was our .... Remain's...... job to point out clearly that if A, then B would have to follow. WHY it wasn't going to be gold plated unicorns.
And to do so in terms which would have been understood.
The problem is that explaining "if A then B" wasn't credible because of the perception that the EU would buckle and give the UK anything to avoid collapse.
The most effective message would have been to convince people that the EU won't go away. Perhaps images of the British delegation being locked out of the room, or British people being made to stand in the rest of the world queue in Malaga.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
So here we are.
What exactly would you suggest was promised by Vote Leave that was incompatible with leaving the Customs Union?
I think all summed up in the claim that Italian prosecco growers were not going to let us exit without a deal.
But seriously, the Vote Leave was all about cake and eating cake. There would be no problems, we were told, in Northern Ireland, for goods exporters, for supply chains, etc etc.
But turns out that - as with most of the Leave manifesto - it wasn’t true.
Of course, Leave wouldn’t have won if they’d said there were trade-offs.
To be fair, it wasn't Leave's jobs to point out that there would have to be trade-offs. It was our .... Remain's...... job to point out clearly that if A, then B would have to follow. WHY it wasn't going to be gold plated unicorns.
And to do so in terms which would have been understood.
You are far too fair.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
Mr. Meeks, you argued people never mentioned leaving the customs union. Now, after I showed you footage of various people mentioning just that, you're changing your argument.
No I'm not. My argument is short and sweet. Leave based its campaign on xenophobia and the NHS fake pledge. That's all that's remembered now.
Of course Vote Leave produced a load of other stuff. I have no doubt that you can find a Vote Leave policy on basket-weaving if you dig deep enough. But it wouldn't form part of the mandate because that wasn't what Vote Leave chose to make the campaign about.
The referendum having been won on xenophobic lies, that (and more money for the NHS) is all that has to be delivered.
Ah, back in the realms of Mr Meeks' fantasies again.
Proven to have made a false statement he resorts to his tired old rubbish about xenophobia.
Wipe the spittle from your eyes. I have given abundant evidence for my claims. The Brexit crazies who are trying to spin moonbeams from cucumbers fail to realise just how uninterested the general public was in the customs union. Hardly surprising, as Vote Leave indulged in lace curtain racism to secure their victory.
You have given no evidence at all, only your own deranged ravings. You have been shown to have made a false statement when both leaflets and speeches ere shown to have made abundant reference to getting back control of our ability to make our own trade deals. It was one of the key claims made by Vote Leave but you choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit with your personal delusions.
Man up Meeks. You got caught out peddling false news.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
Mr. Glenn, it's that kind of bullshit that made people who were 50/50 opt to leave.
If the political class keep us in, or halfway in, the current political climate could get a lot worse. Asking people what they think and then treating their answer with contempt because they had the temerity to disagree with what the political/media class wanted is a great way to foster political divisions.
If Leavers had thought leaving the customs union was vitally important, they should have banged on about it during the referendum campaign. Instead they decided to campaign on pushing bogus savings into the NHS and telling xenophobic lies. That is the nature of the mandate they secured.
The customs union does not form part of the referendum mandate.
Meeks proving that he himself is the master of Fake news.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
I think you’re right. The ability to make trade deals was certainly promised. But so were other things that are perhaps incompatible with leaving the customs union.
So here we are.
What exactly would you suggest was promised by Vote Leave that was incompatible with leaving the Customs Union?
For example:
Boris Johnson: Brexit would not affect Irish border
Staying in the Customs Union will make no difference to that issue as you well know since we would still be leaving the Single Market so there would still have to be a border of some sort. Try again.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
The Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory - or equally not as the case may be. Both official campaigns said stuff that was false or misleading but I think the public are far brighter than you and most Remainers give them credit for.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, I suspect his politics have had their day.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
It was like Hilary Clinton's speech about the Deplorables. When you tell a big chunk of the voters how much you dislike them, they react.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
It was like Hilary Clinton's speech about the Deplorables. When you tell a big chunk of the voters how much you dislike them, they react.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
It was like Hilary Clinton's speech about the Deplorables. When you tell a big chunk of the voters how much you dislike them, they react.
Blair won a landslide.
And yet would now likely fail to win a local council by election, such is the effect of his legacy.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
The Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory - or equally not as the case may be. Both official campaigns said stuff that was false or misleading but I think the public are far brighter than you and most Remainers give them credit for.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
The Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory - or equally not as the case may be. Both official campaigns said stuff that was false or misleading but I think the public are far brighter than you and most Remainers give them credit for.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
The Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory - or equally not as the case may be. Both official campaigns said stuff that was false or misleading but I think the public are far brighter than you and most Remainers give them credit for.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
"Resistance is futile" has been the argument in favour of many political movements which ultimately failed.
If cyclefree's definition of racism/anti-Semitism is as she says and apparently internationally accepted "A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" then the article above in Haaretz would have the boys in blue buzzing like bees and Bolton would be being read his rights...
'John Bolton was chairman of an anti Muslim thinktank that falsely claimed a looming jihadist takeover of Europe leading to a "Great White Death"
Dear Roger: try reading more carefully. I quoted the definition of racism set out in the McPherson report which has been accepted by the police in the UK. I did not say that it had been accepted internationally.
An article - written by whom? - is not an incident. And the paper is doing its job by pointing out the false claims of the think tank.
I wasn't suggesting Haaretz was being racist but Bolton. Extremely offensive to Muslims. Though using the definition you used it wouldn't be necessary to be a Muslim just being offended on their behalf would do.
Incidentally I wasn't trying to misquote you but when you said 'The definition of racism adopted by the inquiry and since then more or less universally adopted by the police and most organisations....' I took 'universally' to mean more widely than just the UK.......
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
The Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory - or equally not as the case may be. Both official campaigns said stuff that was false or misleading but I think the public are far brighter than you and most Remainers give them credit for.
I agree that the Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory. Perhaps the one thing which, emotionally, most pushed me into the Leave camp was the 'there would have been no Gruffalo without the EU' claim posted by many on facebook - because it was bollocks of the first order, and, emotionally, I can be pushed away from a cause I might rationally believe in by bollocks of that order. (I'm not, of course, saying that there was no bollocks from Leave, but if you spent any time on facebook during the campaign 99% of the claims you saw - and therefore 99% of the bollocks - was Remain bollocks). And I also agree that the public are brighter than they are given credit for, though God knows there are enough out there valiantly trying to disprove it.
But I sort of agree with Gardenwalker's final point. Most of us recognise that Europe has benefits and costs, monetary and otherwise. Some of us want none of the costs and none of the benefits, some of us want all the benefits and all the costs. Many want some of the costs and some of the benefits - less Europe than we had, but still some Europe (and if we had been offered a vote on Lisbon then this whol emess might have been avoided). We weren't offered that in the referendum, but I think it is a position that te electorate might grudingly settle at. Me, I'm getting increasingly hard-Brexity, and would hope we get rather further out than a customs union - but even Iwould liketo see some Europe - co-operation on science, for example, for which I accept that there would be some costs. But while I want to see my favoured outcome win, I also want to see an outcome which is widely supported, and I want to put the divisions of the referendum behind us. I may consider the outcome of 'some Europe' sub-optimal but I am prepared to trade a little sub-optimality for a more widely-supported solution. That, too, is part of democracy. I'd hope we'd go at least slightly further than customs union, though. Norway model, at least.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union. It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
The Remain platform was equally as mendacious and contradictory - or equally not as the case may be. Both official campaigns said stuff that was false or misleading but I think the public are far brighter than you and most Remainers give them credit for.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
I do find that Brexit brings out the worst in people. I come on here very infrequently now whereas PB used to be my first place for news and comment.
What annoys me the most is hypocrisy of the thing. The cities who want cheap and plentiful labour, and who are used to diverse and ever changing communities are naturally both the place for remain and where the benefit will be felt most. If you live in the provinces the effect of mobile cheap labour is much more likely to come into conflict with your interests. I find the constant accusations of racism on the part of leavers particularly annoying as I was 50/50 on which way to vote so can see both sides. You would hardly say that criminals preferred free movement as it is easier for them to make a getaway from their crimes therefore all remainers are criminals!
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
"Resistance is futile" has been the argument in favour of many political movements which ultimately failed.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
Here’s the thing: even you had serious sympathy with some of the arguments being made by Leave at the time. Many of us on this forum did, even amongst the more vociferously anti ones now.
There is a far smaller gap between us than is made out. The British (broadly) were and are dissatisfied with the status quo of our EU membership and it struck at the core of our ideas about what democracy should be about.
"Jewish leaders say Jeremy Corbyn's proposals to wipe out anti-Semitism in Labour "fell short of the minimum level of action".
The Board of Deputies and Jewish Leadership Council claimed there were "disappointing missed opportunities" following the crunch meeting they held with him on Tuesday afternoon.
They accused Mr Corbyn of "failing to agree to any of the concrete actions" proposed in a letter to him in March."
I am interested, academically, in this idea that people nowadays still look back with yearning for the lost days of Empire. Lost an Empire and looking for a role (I paraphrase).
What is it that we are supposed to be looking back at? Most people nowadays, including myself, have no conception of what Empire was or meant. How is whatever it was supposed to be relevant to life today?
Why are we supposed to be looking for a role? It seems to me we have a very definite role, so much so that I myself would prefer us to keep a far lower profile globally.
I've deliberately not asked this question in a Reply to the poster who mentioned it an hour or so ago, because I'd like to avoid any implication of stirring up emotions. I really am interested in why the idea persists in spite of the time elapsed. I can't understand why the idea has any validity.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
What a depressing post. Especially so as you're probably right
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Excellent in the sense that he went on to win the following general election by a country mile.
Albert Thompson, the guy with prostate cancer who was told he’d have to pay now has a date for his NHS radiotherapy to start. He’s pleased about it, and understandably, but he’s not going to have a fun-filled few weeks! Still it’ll be worth it it in the longer term.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
Here’s the thing: even you had serious sympathy with some of the arguments being made by Leave at the time. Many of us on this forum did, even amongst the more vociferously anti ones now.
There is a far smaller gap between us than is made out. The British (broadly) were and are dissatisfied with the status quo of our EU membership and it struck at the core of our ideas about what democracy should be about.
Perhaps more than usual both sides of debate were coalitions. For my part I felt the EU imperfect but more capable of reform than the Westminster / Whitehall system, a basket in which we are about to invest all our eggs.
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
Here’s the thing: even you had serious sympathy with some of the arguments being made by Leave at the time. Many of us on this forum did, even amongst the more vociferously anti ones now.
There is a far smaller gap between us than is made out. The British (broadly) were and are dissatisfied with the status quo of our EU membership and it struck at the core of our ideas about what democracy should be about.
If you truly believe there is a small gap (and you may be right) why do Leavers insist on trying to expand that gap by insisting on an ultra form of Brexit? An EFTA/EEA solution would respect the vote and bring the two sides closer together.
"Jewish leaders say Jeremy Corbyn's proposals to wipe out anti-Semitism in Labour "fell short of the minimum level of action".
The Board of Deputies and Jewish Leadership Council claimed there were "disappointing missed opportunities" following the crunch meeting they held with him on Tuesday afternoon.
They accused Mr Corbyn of "failing to agree to any of the concrete actions" proposed in a letter to him in March."
"They said the following suggested points of action were rejected:
*) A fixed timetable to deal with anti-Semitism cases *) Expedite the long-standing cases involving Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker *) No MP should share a platform with somebody expelled or suspended for anti-Semitism *) Adopt in full the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism *) Transparent oversight of the disciplinary process"
Those seem fairly simple and reasonable requests. Can anyone think of good reasons they might have been rejected?
"Jewish leaders say Jeremy Corbyn's proposals to wipe out anti-Semitism in Labour "fell short of the minimum level of action".
The Board of Deputies and Jewish Leadership Council claimed there were "disappointing missed opportunities" following the crunch meeting they held with him on Tuesday afternoon.
They accused Mr Corbyn of "failing to agree to any of the concrete actions" proposed in a letter to him in March."
"They said the following suggested points of action were rejected:
*) A fixed timetable to deal with anti-Semitism cases *) Expedite the long-standing cases involving Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker *) No MP should share a platform with somebody expelled or suspended for anti-Semitism *) Adopt in full the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti- Semitism *) Transparent oversight of the disciplinary process"
Those seem fairly simple and reasonable requests. Can anyone think of good reasons they might have been rejected?
Because Labour aren't serious about dealing with it?
Probably completely useless anecdote but we took the dogs on a very long walk of the Haringey part of Highgate. Quite a few Lib Dem posters, no Labour posters unlike the GE when there were a fair few, particularly in the big houses.
Meanwhile in our Highgate ward on the Camden side, a fair few Green urging Tory and Lib Dem voters to vote tactically and go Green to stop Camden becoming a one party state. Only saw one Labour poster, far down on last year.
It made me think about what Owen Jones had tweeted about the Labour polls and it struck me that, essentially, political parties are brands, like any other brand, and they have a set of values associated with them. Just as few people could tell you the chemical reason why Domestos is better than a cheaper bleach, so few people know the exact differences in policies between parties. But people vote for parties based on perception and what they think needs to be done. The Conservatives are mean but good when you need hard tasks doing and Labour is nice and fluffy. People generally vote Tory when they think things are a mess and Labour when they want to feel good about themselves.
The point here is that the real danger to Labour from all this anti-Semitism stuff is that it strips away at that nice and fluffy feeling which is at the core of their brand value. It is like finding out that Domestos isn't that great at killing germs. It is alright shouting "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" and having Labour posters in your window when you think you are showing how good and virtuous are and not a grasping capitalist. It is less good when people look at you and start to think whether you are a raging anti-Semite or what nasty things you have said about people. Granted, as we have seen here, it doesn't change the views of those who support JC but it strips away at the soft underbelly.
"Jewish leaders say Jeremy Corbyn's proposals to wipe out anti-Semitism in Labour "fell short of the minimum level of action".
The Board of Deputies and Jewish Leadership Council claimed there were "disappointing missed opportunities" following the crunch meeting they held with him on Tuesday afternoon.
They accused Mr Corbyn of "failing to agree to any of the concrete actions" proposed in a letter to him in March."
"They said the following suggested points of action were rejected:
*) A fixed timetable to deal with anti-Semitism cases *) Expedite the long-standing cases involving Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker *) No MP should share a platform with somebody expelled or suspended for anti-Semitism *) Adopt in full the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti- Semitism *) Transparent oversight of the disciplinary process"
Those seem fairly simple and reasonable requests. Can anyone think of good reasons they might have been rejected?
Because Labour aren't serious about dealing with it?
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
What a depressing post. Especially so as you're probably right
I know several Freemasons and WI members, mostly in a rural area, who voted Remain. The Current Affairs discussion group at the U3a to which I belong is solidly Remain.
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
Would you say the same about the equivalent groups for Muslims?
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
Would you say the same about the equivalent groups for Muslims?
Don't know about Roger but I certainly would. I am dubious about anyone claiming to be a community leader who is not elected to the position.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
Here’s the thing: even you had serious sympathy with some of the arguments being made by Leave at the time. Many of us on this forum did, even amongst the more vociferously anti ones now.
There is a far smaller gap between us than is made out. The British (broadly) were and are dissatisfied with the status quo of our EU membership and it struck at the core of our ideas about what democracy should be about.
If you truly believe there is a small gap (and you may be right) why do Leavers insist on trying to expand that gap by insisting on an ultra form of Brexit? An EFTA/EEA solution would respect the vote and bring the two sides closer together.
[Awaits HYUFD auto-rebuttal]
If that’s what united the country and allowed us to move on together, I’d take it like a shot.
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
I also am slightly dubious about unelected 'leaders', but the things they asked for (see a later post on here) seem utterly reasonable to me. And if they are not to be taken seriously, why did Corbyn meet them?
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Maybe, the forces of small c conservatives of the right and left are certainly having their day at the moment. But nothing lasts forever, they will be defeated once more.
Given your fave is generally considered amongst the least popular politicians or ex politicians in Britain, Is suspect his politics have had their day.
Much like conservatism at the time of the speech. Nothing lasts forever. The economic and social forces unleashed by technology mean change is coming whether we like it or not.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
Here’s the thing: even you had serious sympathy with some of the arguments being made by Leave at the time. Many of us on this forum did, even amongst the more vociferously anti ones now.
There is a far smaller gap between us than is made out. The British (broadly) were and are dissatisfied with the status quo of our EU membership and it struck at the core of our ideas about what democracy should be about.
If you truly believe there is a small gap (and you may be right) why do Leavers insist on trying to expand that gap by insisting on an ultra form of Brexit? An EFTA/EEA solution would respect the vote and bring the two sides closer together.
[Awaits HYUFD auto-rebuttal]
If that’s what united the country and allowed us to move on together, I’d take it like a shot.
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
Would you say the same about the equivalent groups for Muslims?
Of course I would. Though the opinions of British Jews happen to be particularly diverse. Greville Janner was President of the Board of Deputies for years which gives you a clue of the standing in which they were held
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
Would you say the same about the equivalent groups for Muslims?
Don't know about Roger but I certainly would. I am dubious about anyone claiming to be a community leader who is not elected to the position.
I agree, though there are clearly issues in the Labour Party that need addressing.
I spent some time in California two weeks ago. To put in context, my wife is from Los Angeles and we visit twice a year to visit her family who are staunch Democrats. I have been making that trip for over 20 years.
I have to say that, obvious though it sounds, this was the most polarised I have ever seen both the TV and national news. You could take the same information and both sides will give you diametrically opposing interpretations. Neither side had much good to say about the other.
One thing about the whole Mueller investigation that has not had much reporting over here is that, for Republicans and the Trump fans, the real story about Mueller is not about Russian collaboration but how the evidence allegedly points to the "Deep State" trying to overthrow Trump and how the Obama administration used the FBI and CIA to hand victory to Clinton and then tried to overthrow Trump when he won. That is energising the Republican base in favour of Trump.
Two US betting implications I thought of.
1. I think Republican turnout will be high. The consensus view is that there will be a blue wave but, apart from the generic Congress polls have been tightening, the Trump fan base looks very incentivised to come out and vote to defend their man. I don't know whether the Arizona 8th voting is a sign of that given the early trends.
2. I don't for the life of me see how Democrat senators in places like West Virginia, Montana, Indiana or Missouri are going to survive. Regardless of how good or popular they are, people are just taking sides and saying you are either with us or against us. I am sure someone will produce a poll saying Democrat senators are hanging on in places like that but I really do not see it. The mood has just become so polarised that people are not going to cross-vote.
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
Would you say the same about the equivalent groups for Muslims?
Of course I would. Though the opinions of British Jews happen to be particularly diverse. Greville Janner was President of the Board of Deputies for years which gives you a clue of the standing in which they were held
I do not understand your reference to Greville Janner - I genuinely do not get your point
I am interested, academically, in this idea that people nowadays still look back with yearning for the lost days of Empire. Lost an Empire and looking for a role (I paraphrase).
What is it that we are supposed to be looking back at? Most people nowadays, including myself, have no conception of what Empire was or meant. How is whatever it was supposed to be relevant to life today?
Why are we supposed to be looking for a role? It seems to me we have a very definite role, so much so that I myself would prefer us to keep a far lower profile globally.
I've deliberately not asked this question in a Reply to the poster who mentioned it an hour or so ago, because I'd like to avoid any implication of stirring up emotions. I really am interested in why the idea persists in spite of the time elapsed. I can't understand why the idea has any validity.
I think Brits have an imperial state of mind, rather than a hankering for Empire per se. A delusion about our position and centrality in the world, a complacent arrogance if you like. There are both left and right wing versions, and it is pandered to by much of the press. There is a prevailing belief that we are special because of reasons starting with World War 2. This may be true, but it seems to hamper honest, hard-headed self appraisal.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
The best speech by a PM in my lifetime. Singled out much that was and remains wrong with Britain.
And an excellent recruitment aid for those who identify with small or large c conservatism.
Excellent in the sense that he went on to win the following general election by a country mile.
' What can we do to combat this? In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context. '
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Did you check the primary source ie the ONS agricultural jobs or were you guilty of wishful thinking and failed to 'scrutinise carefully a story that confirms your prejudices' ?
You seem to think the claims are inconsistent. You have made a claim I haven't commented on, but you have dismissed a claim that I have made for which on different occasions I have provided a good deal of evidence.
Your 'evidence' appears to be unqueried anecdotes from people with a vested interest reported in biased newspapers.
Have you looked for a 'primary source document' to back your 'evidence' up ?
Have you 'tried to get context' ?
Have you been 'especially sceptical of information that produces a strong emotional response from you.' ?
Have you 'asked yourself who wants to produce that response' ?
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
What a depressing post. Especially so as you're probably right
I know several Freemasons and WI members, mostly in a rural area, who voted Remain. The Current Affairs discussion group at the U3a to which I belong is solidly Remain.
I am interested, academically, in this idea that people nowadays still look back with yearning for the lost days of Empire. Lost an Empire and looking for a role (I paraphrase).
What is it that we are supposed to be looking back at? Most people nowadays, including myself, have no conception of what Empire was or meant. How is whatever it was supposed to be relevant to life today?
Why are we supposed to be looking for a role? It seems to me we have a very definite role, so much so that I myself would prefer us to keep a far lower profile globally.
I've deliberately not asked this question in a Reply to the poster who mentioned it an hour or so ago, because I'd like to avoid any implication of stirring up emotions. I really am interested in why the idea persists in spite of the time elapsed. I can't understand why the idea has any validity.
I think Brits have an imperial state of mind, rather than a hankering for Empire per se. A delusion about our position and centrality in the world, a complacent arrogance if you like. There are both left and right wing versions, and it is pandered to by much of the press. There is a prevailing belief that we are special because of reasons starting with World War 2. This may be true, but it seems to hamper honest, hard-headed self appraisal.
Thank you for the reply.
I am not convinced, but it is too deep and, I suppose, too far off topic to pursue.
I am interested, academically, in this idea that people nowadays still look back with yearning for the lost days of Empire. Lost an Empire and looking for a role (I paraphrase).
What is it that we are supposed to be looking back at? Most people nowadays, including myself, have no conception of what Empire was or meant. How is whatever it was supposed to be relevant to life today?
Why are we supposed to be looking for a role? It seems to me we have a very definite role, so much so that I myself would prefer us to keep a far lower profile globally.
I've deliberately not asked this question in a Reply to the poster who mentioned it an hour or so ago, because I'd like to avoid any implication of stirring up emotions. I really am interested in why the idea persists in spite of the time elapsed. I can't understand why the idea has any validity.
I think Brits have an imperial state of mind, rather than a hankering for Empire per se. A delusion about our position and centrality in the world, a complacent arrogance if you like. There are both left and right wing versions, and it is pandered to by much of the press. There is a prevailing belief that we are special because of reasons starting with World War 2. This may be true, but it seems to hamper honest, hard-headed self appraisal.
Thank you for the reply.
I am not convinced, but it is too deep and, I suppose, too far off topic to pursue.
I would argue it’s quite ingrained and actually difficult to perceive unless you’re an outsider. But it is often remarked upon by my non-British acquaintances. I’m only pseudo-British myself, having moved here as an adult.
Of course, every country has delusions. But the British delusion does seem like an imperial legacy.
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders" who the BBC refer to? There are 250,000 Jews in Britain. I'd be surprised if they represent more than 10% and as far as I know no one voted for them. Who are the 7th day Adventists leaders or the leaders of the British Catholics and who speaks on behalf of the Rastafarians. To describe an unelected group of Jewish people as "Jewish Leaders" is patronising bordering on offensive
Well the Catholics is ++Westminster.
The British Board of Deputies is the recognised body that represents British Jews. I don’t know, nor do I particular care, how they are selected.
The Queen, for example, is unelected but she is undoubtedly a “British leader”
I am interested, academically, in this idea that people nowadays still look back with yearning for the lost days of Empire. Lost an Empire and looking for a role (I paraphrase).
What is it that we are supposed to be looking back at? Most people nowadays, including myself, have no conception of what Empire was or meant. How is whatever it was supposed to be relevant to life today?
Why are we supposed to be looking for a role? It seems to me we have a very definite role, so much so that I myself would prefer us to keep a far lower profile globally.
I've deliberately not asked this question in a Reply to the poster who mentioned it an hour or so ago, because I'd like to avoid any implication of stirring up emotions. I really am interested in why the idea persists in spite of the time elapsed. I can't understand why the idea has any validity.
I think Brits have an imperial state of mind, rather than a hankering for Empire per se. A delusion about our position and centrality in the world, a complacent arrogance if you like. There are both left and right wing versions, and it is pandered to by much of the press. There is a prevailing belief that we are special because of reasons starting with World War 2. This may be true, but it seems to hamper honest, hard-headed self appraisal.
I think this is getting closer to the truth. The mindset is not so much imperial as hegemonic; we are the centre of the world and what we think matters.
Only this can explain the absurdity of hundreds of MPs sounding off about the launch of 8 missiles, carried by 4 aircraft which are going out of service next year.
I think victory in the Falklands conflict is a big factor in its persistence.
Comments
Most people can't recall the 2012 Spanish qualifying controversy. I can, because I happened to get lucky (Hamilton was fastest but got disqualified and I was able to back Maldonado and Alonso, starting 1-2, at about 6 each to lead lap 1). The fact other people can't remember doesn't alter what happened.
Leaving the customs union was raised many times. Doing our own trade deals was mentioned many times. Pretending otherwise is to just claim things that did happen did not, because they're inconvenient for you.
Xenophobia and dishonesty does remind me of that Polish chap that was killed by a mixed race gang, which was attributed by some people to the 'xenophobia' stirred up by the vote [oddly, this hasn't stopped the vast majority being aghast at the Windrush scandal...]. Still, when you put your "racist-tinted glasses" on, I suppose it's easy to see hatred for foreigners where it doesn't exist.
It's why only the hardcore Remainers mention the empire. It soothes them to think that racism, backwardness, a silly nostalgia is behind the vote to leave. It wasn't made by thinking people, as clever as them, but by foolish types far away from London, yearning for a bygone age. They couldn't possibly have rejected the EU, could they?
So, they bang on and on and on about xenophobia, and empire, and drown out almost everything else, and then claim the xenophobia was the reason why Leave won. If your side had spent some time promoting the advantages of the EU (and there are some advantages, though I feel they're outweighed by the disadvantages, and that balance would only worsen) instead of pointing at the electorate and proclaiming them racist for even thinking of voting the same way as Farage, you would've won.
All you had to do was make an argument. Instead, there was just noise. And you lost.
Anyway, I am moderately pestilent, so I'm going to bugger off now.
If you go and look at the leaflets that all the organisations campaigning for Leave handed out they all mention the inability to make our own trade deals as one of the key reasons for voting Leave. They were indeed banging on about it all the time. You just weren't paying any attention because you were so desperate to find racism and xenophobia in the campaign.
The fake news - crops are unharvested because migrant workers have been driven away.
Lets look at a primary source:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/timeseries/jwr5/lms
The reality - agricultural jobs at their highest for twenty years.
'John Bolton was chairman of an anti Muslim thinktank that falsely claimed a looming jihadist takeover of Europe leading to a "Great White Death"
So here we are.
Of course Vote Leave produced a load of other stuff. I have no doubt that you can find a Vote Leave policy on basket-weaving if you dig deep enough. But it wouldn't form part of the mandate because that wasn't what Vote Leave chose to make the campaign about.
The referendum having been won on xenophobic lies, that (and more money for the NHS) is all that has to be delivered.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-crops-eu-farm-workers-brexit-referendum-rot-manpower-recruitment-numbers-a8194701.html
Someone will need to logon to the university library and see if they can find it in the original. Even if the words are accurately cited, it’s possible we are missing context.
After all, “there’s no such thing as society”
If it had been a key reason, that, rather than vile posters terrifying the public that hordes of Turks were arriving, would have been plastered over every bus stop in the land.
An article - written by whom? - is not an incident. And the paper is doing its job by pointing out the false claims of the think tank.
The definition of anti-Semitism accepted and used by the Labour Party (as well as by the government) is based on guidelines drawn up by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. You can find the details here - https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/sites/default/files/press_release_document_antisemitism.pdf.
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/988433822596370432?s=19
Proven to have made a false statement he resorts to his tired old rubbish about xenophobia.
Boris Johnson: Brexit would not affect Irish border
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-35692452
But seriously, the Vote Leave was all about cake and eating cake. There would be no problems, we were told, in Northern Ireland, for goods exporters, for supply chains, etc etc.
But turns out that - as with most of the Leave manifesto - it wasn’t true.
Of course, Leave wouldn’t have won if they’d said there were trade-offs.
' In short, be sceptical. If you’re told something eyebrow-raising, look for a primary source to back it up. Try to get context.
Be especially sceptical of information that produces a strong emotional response from you. Ask yourself who wants to produce that response. '
This seems to be the key claim:
' James Orr, whose farm outside St Andrews produces potatoes, carrots, parsnips, broccoli, cauliflower, said his farm suffered a 15 per cent drop in the number of workers between August and November. '
Wow a 15% drop in workers between August and November - sounds like a lot. But how does that compare with the agricultural sector in general.
The ONS gives agricultural employment as
2017q3 459k
2017q4 453k
No 15% fall there, but lets compare those quarters with previous years:
2016q3 420k
2016q4 443k
2015q3 427k
2015q4 423k
A rise in the agricultural workforce.
So perhaps we might look for an alternative explanation as to why Farmer Orr's workforce has fallen - perhaps other farmers are providing better pay and conditions and so getting their crops harvested.
And to do so in terms which would have been understood.
The most effective message would have been to convince people that the EU won't go away. Perhaps images of the British delegation being locked out of the room, or British people being made to stand in the rest of the world queue in Malaga.
We are talking about whether it is somehow undemocratic to stay in the customs union.
It is not, because the Leave platform was mendacious and contradictory.
We - executive, Parliament, and country - are now forced to expose those lies and paper over those contradictions. Hence, potentially, a customs union.
Man up Meeks. You got caught out peddling false news.
In broad terms, Brexit was a victory for Provincial Britain over Metropolitan Britain. The sort of people who join the Freemasons, Rotary Club, Womens' institute and other local clubs and societies, and the people who share their values and interests, won a rare victory.
William Glenn has a point when he says Blair's "Forces of Conservatism" speech was fatal for the pro-EU cause.
You can either retreat behind Brexit borders and Trump walls or embrace it.
Incidentally I wasn't trying to misquote you but when you said 'The definition of racism adopted by the inquiry and since then more or less universally adopted by the police and most organisations....' I took 'universally' to mean more widely than just the UK.......
and Liverpool have scored!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43887223
Hardly unexpected. The man has a tin ear and a blind eye.
But I sort of agree with Gardenwalker's final point.
Most of us recognise that Europe has benefits and costs, monetary and otherwise. Some of us want none of the costs and none of the benefits, some of us want all the benefits and all the costs. Many want some of the costs and some of the benefits - less Europe than we had, but still some Europe (and if we had been offered a vote on Lisbon then this whol emess might have been avoided). We weren't offered that in the referendum, but I think it is a position that te electorate might grudingly settle at. Me, I'm getting increasingly hard-Brexity, and would hope we get rather further out than a customs union - but even Iwould liketo see some Europe - co-operation on science, for example, for which I accept that there would be some costs. But while I want to see my favoured outcome win, I also want to see an outcome which is widely supported, and I want to put the divisions of the referendum behind us. I may consider the outcome of 'some Europe' sub-optimal but I am prepared to trade a little sub-optimality for a more widely-supported solution. That, too, is part of democracy.
I'd hope we'd go at least slightly further than customs union, though. Norway model, at least.
What annoys me the most is hypocrisy of the thing. The cities who want cheap and plentiful labour, and who are used to diverse and ever changing communities are naturally both the place for remain and where the benefit will be felt most. If you live in the provinces the effect of mobile cheap labour is much more likely to come into conflict with your interests. I find the constant accusations of racism on the part of leavers particularly annoying as I was 50/50 on which way to vote so can see both sides. You would hardly say that criminals preferred free movement as it is easier for them to make a getaway from their crimes therefore all remainers are criminals!
There is a far smaller gap between us than is made out. The British (broadly) were and are dissatisfied with the status quo of our EU membership and it struck at the core of our ideas about what democracy should be about.
The Board of Deputies and Jewish Leadership Council claimed there were "disappointing missed opportunities" following the crunch meeting they held with him on Tuesday afternoon.
They accused Mr Corbyn of "failing to agree to any of the concrete actions" proposed in a letter to him in March."
https://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-anti-semitism-promises-fell-short-jewish-leaders-say-11345415
What is it that we are supposed to be looking back at? Most people nowadays, including myself, have no conception of what Empire was or meant. How is whatever it was supposed to be relevant to life today?
Why are we supposed to be looking for a role? It seems to me we have a very definite role, so much so that I myself would prefer us to keep a far lower profile globally.
I've deliberately not asked this question in a Reply to the poster who mentioned it an hour or so ago, because I'd like to avoid any implication of stirring up emotions. I really am interested in why the idea persists in spite of the time elapsed. I can't understand why the idea has any validity.
He’s pleased about it, and understandably, but he’s not going to have a fun-filled few weeks!
Still it’ll be worth it it in the longer term.
[Awaits HYUFD auto-rebuttal]
*) A fixed timetable to deal with anti-Semitism cases
*) Expedite the long-standing cases involving Ken Livingstone and Jackie Walker
*) No MP should share a platform with somebody expelled or suspended for anti-Semitism
*) Adopt in full the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism
*) Transparent oversight of the disciplinary process"
Those seem fairly simple and reasonable requests. Can anyone think of good reasons they might have been rejected?
Probably completely useless anecdote but we took the dogs on a very long walk of the Haringey part of Highgate. Quite a few Lib Dem posters, no Labour posters unlike the GE when there were a fair few, particularly in the big houses.
Meanwhile in our Highgate ward on the Camden side, a fair few Green urging Tory and Lib Dem voters to vote tactically and go Green to stop Camden becoming a one party state. Only saw one Labour poster, far down on last year.
It made me think about what Owen Jones had tweeted about the Labour polls and it struck me that, essentially, political parties are brands, like any other brand, and they have a set of values associated with them. Just as few people could tell you the chemical reason why Domestos is better than a cheaper bleach, so few people know the exact differences in policies between parties. But people vote for parties based on perception and what they think needs to be done. The Conservatives are mean but good when you need hard tasks doing and Labour is nice and fluffy. People generally vote Tory when they think things are a mess and Labour when they want to feel good about themselves.
The point here is that the real danger to Labour from all this anti-Semitism stuff is that it strips away at that nice and fluffy feeling which is at the core of their brand value. It is like finding out that Domestos isn't that great at killing germs. It is alright shouting "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" and having Labour posters in your window when you think you are showing how good and virtuous are and not a grasping capitalist. It is less good when people look at you and start to think whether you are a raging anti-Semite or what nasty things you have said about people. Granted, as we have seen here, it doesn't change the views of those who support JC but it strips away at the soft underbelly.
An example of a task we need doing that they have done properly in recent years would be?
https://order-order.com/2018/04/24/labour-parliamentary-candidate-im-mood-beat-prince-william/
https://order-order.com/2018/04/23/labour-ppc-my-legal-battle-with-mi5-mi6-and-progress-was-above-board/
https://order-order.com/2018/04/23/two-more-labour-candidates-blasted-illegal-sexuality-women-and-jewish-money/
http://hurryupharry.org/2018/04/22/tough-questions-for-owen-jones-2/
http://hurryupharry.org/2018/04/21/is-supporting-assassination-a-red-line-for-labour/
Having said that Salah is looking very Messi like
New thread, btw.
I spent some time in California two weeks ago. To put in context, my wife is from Los Angeles and we visit twice a year to visit her family who are staunch Democrats. I have been making that trip for over 20 years.
I have to say that, obvious though it sounds, this was the most polarised I have ever seen both the TV and national news. You could take the same information and both sides will give you diametrically opposing interpretations. Neither side had much good to say about the other.
One thing about the whole Mueller investigation that has not had much reporting over here is that, for Republicans and the Trump fans, the real story about Mueller is not about Russian collaboration but how the evidence allegedly points to the "Deep State" trying to overthrow Trump and how the Obama administration used the FBI and CIA to hand victory to Clinton and then tried to overthrow Trump when he won. That is energising the Republican base in favour of Trump.
Two US betting implications I thought of.
1. I think Republican turnout will be high. The consensus view is that there will be a blue wave but, apart from the generic Congress polls have been tightening, the Trump fan base looks very incentivised to come out and vote to defend their man. I don't know whether the Arizona 8th voting is a sign of that given the early trends.
2. I don't for the life of me see how Democrat senators in places like West Virginia, Montana, Indiana or Missouri are going to survive. Regardless of how good or popular they are, people are just taking sides and saying you are either with us or against us. I am sure someone will produce a poll saying Democrat senators are hanging on in places like that but I really do not see it. The mood has just become so polarised that people are not going to cross-vote.
There is a prevailing belief that we are special because of reasons starting with World War 2.
This may be true, but it seems to hamper honest, hard-headed self appraisal.
Have you looked for a 'primary source document' to back your 'evidence' up ?
Have you 'tried to get context' ?
Have you been 'especially sceptical of information that produces a strong emotional response from you.' ?
Have you 'asked yourself who wants to produce that response' ?
I am not convinced, but it is too deep and, I suppose, too far off topic to pursue.
Of course, every country has delusions.
But the British delusion does seem like an imperial legacy.
The British Board of Deputies is the recognised body that represents British Jews. I don’t know, nor do I particular care, how they are selected.
The Queen, for example, is unelected but she is undoubtedly a “British leader”
Only this can explain the absurdity of hundreds of MPs sounding off about the launch of 8 missiles, carried by 4 aircraft which are going out of service next year.
I think victory in the Falklands conflict is a big factor in its persistence.