The number of seats markets for November could be rather volatile...
The second derivative of this is that the Democrats are going to win control of state senates for the same reason. It will then be Democrats doing the gerrymandering.
The Democrats will have to have a serious rethink if the GOP holds both the Senate and House later this year.
The Republicans will hold the Senate, unless something truly astonishing happens.
On current polls it would be tied, the Democrats would pick up Nevada and Arizona but lose Montana, Pence would thus have the casting vote
Some polls also have the Democrats ahead in Tennessee which would give them a Senate majority along with a likely House majority.
If so Trump would face the worst mid-term thumping in his first term since Bill Clinton in 1994, seeing his party lose both Chambers of Congress in one set of mid-terms
West Virginia is looking a bit more iffy for the Dems as the GOP electorate chose not to shot themselves in the foot and did not elect the expected winner after all, a coal mine owner with the deaths of 20+ miners on his watch.
Manchin still leads Morrissey 45% to 38% on the latest poll
It's like the Junior Common Room of Tory Central Office in here most nights, tonight being a prime example. The juvenile hubris is palpable.
This is a far more important issue than Corbyn's plunging popularity with huge sections of the country.
Please carry on with this focus.
Chortle. No doubt we can blame it on 'papism', like most things eh?
Given how the last local election has given us pause for thought in regard to believing polls again (overestimated Labour in London) I’m surprised that we are still taking polls as gospel. After last week’s results, I’m not going to be left with egg on my face because I spent time paying attention to polling that turned out to be rubbish come Election Day, as has been the case in 2015, 2017, and now this year. Three times is enough to learn, no matter how tempting it may be to analyse the latest polling results.
Meanwhile here’s an interesting and set of some alternative takes to what Matthew Goodwin saying here, in this discussion (clicking the tweet will allow you to see the overall discussion as opposed to just one tweet): https://twitter.com/cjayanetti/status/993080318319087616?s=20
Do SpaceX harbour ambitions to colonize Mars (just looking at the thumbnail)? I thought that was Weyland-Yutani's job.
I'm not sure it's quite accurate to say they want to colonise Mars: they want to provide the transport system that would allow Mars to be colonised. The actual colonisation, and the messy stuff like governance, would be looked after by others.
I'd suggest all 'friends of Israel' watch Channel 4 News on the pathetic plight of the Gazans. If anyone thinks it's unreasonable to compare the Israeli regime to the apartheid one in South Africa I would say it is. It's unfair to the South Africans. It's a complete disgrace that the world watches and does nothing
I'd suggest all 'friends of Israel' watch Channel 4 News on the pathetic plight of the Gazans. If anyone thinks it's unreasonable to compare the Israeli regime to the apartheid one in South Africa I would say it is. It's unfair to the South Africans. It's a complete disgrace that the world watches and does nothing
Whilst I agree that the plight of the Palestinians is terrible, South Africa was not surrounded by countries who wanted it wiped from the face of the earth.
It's like the Junior Common Room of Tory Central Office in here most nights, tonight being a prime example. The juvenile hubris is palpable.
This is a far more important issue than Corbyn's plunging popularity with huge sections of the country.
Please carry on with this focus.
Chortle. No doubt we can blame it on 'papism', like most things eh?
Given how the last local election has given us pause for thought in regard to believing polls again (overestimated Labour in London) I’m surprised that we are still taking polls as gospel. After last week’s results, I’m not going to be left with egg on my face because I spent time paying attention to polling that turned out to be rubbish come Election Day, as has been the case in 2015, 2017, and now this year. Three times is enough to learn, no matter how tempting it may be to analyse the latest polling results.
Trusting any one poll is unreliable but when Labour has had only 2 leads in the last 20 polls the general trend is probably worth taking seriously.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
Yes.
The point is this. We voted narrowly to leave the EU. We didn’t vote to become North Korea.
Our policy has to address the fact that a very large minority - even a majority, if you believe polling, actually wanted to stay in the EU and presumably wish to retain strong economic, security and cultural links.
Moreover we can’t ignore the EU anyway. Policy has to recognise that we are now a middle power right on the doorstep of a trade superpower, and one which still takes nearly 50% of our exports.
It's like the Junior Common Room of Tory Central Office in here most nights, tonight being a prime example. The juvenile hubris is palpable.
This is a far more important issue than Corbyn's plunging popularity with huge sections of the country.
Please carry on with this focus.
Chortle. No doubt we can blame it on 'papism', like most things eh?
Given how the last local election has given us pause for thought in regard to believing polls again (overestimated Labour in London) I’m surprised that we are still taking polls as gospel. After last week’s results, I’m not going to be left with egg on my face because I spent time paying attention to polling that turned out to be rubbish come Election Day, as has been the case in 2015, 2017, and now this year. Three times is enough to learn, no matter how tempting it may be to analyse the latest polling results.
Trusting any one poll is unreliable but when Labour has had only 2 leads in the last 20 polls the general trend is probably worth taking seriously.
IIRC there were several polls (over several months) which indicated Labour were going to do much better in London than they actually did, so I think that qualifies as a trend that turned out to be a bit misleading. Then there was last year, in which the trend towards the end of the GE indicated a Tory majority, or in 2015 which indicated that we’d have a hung parliament. I’ve been taking polls seriously over the last several months but the London pollls have shown that polling still has issues, so I’ll be waiting to see what any elections show us.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
Do SpaceX harbour ambitions to colonize Mars (just looking at the thumbnail)? I thought that was Weyland-Yutani's job.
I'm not sure it's quite accurate to say they want to colonise Mars: they want to provide the transport system that would allow Mars to be colonised. The actual colonisation, and the messy stuff like governance, would be looked after by others.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You’re right. The referendum means that Brexit deserved a chance.
Who knew at that time what would happen if a British Prime Minister stood up the week before Trump’s inauguration to announce we were going to leave the EU fully, including the single market and customs union? It could have set off a dominoe effect or Brussels could have been so desperate to keep the EU on the road they offered some fabulous deal to get it done quickly and avoid any contagion.
It was tried, and it failed. It’s now time for us as a nation to think again.
Meanwhile here’s an interesting and set of some alternative takes to what Matthew Goodwin saying here, in this discussion (clicking the tweet will allow you to see the overall discussion as opposed to just one tweet): https://twitter.com/cjayanetti/status/993080318319087616?s=20
However, the long-term demographic trend IS towards growth of the cities and relative shrinking of the small towns - the opposite of how it was from the 50s to the 90s - which should mean, this redrawing or next, a redrawing in favour of labour; or at least less unfavourable to labour than these things have been historically.
Getting pretty fed up with how hard it is to load the comments on my laptop. Reduced to using my phone. It has got a lot worse over the last couple of days.
Getting pretty fed up with how hard it is to load the comments on my laptop. Reduced to using my phone. It has got a lot worse over the last couple of days.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You’re right. The referendum means that Brexit deserved a chance.
Who knew at that time what would happen if a British Prime Minister stood up the week before Trump’s inauguration to announce we were going to leave the EU fully, including the single market and customs union? It could have set off a dominoe effect or Brussels could have been so desperate to keep the EU on the road they offered some fabulous deal to get it done quickly and avoid any contagion.
It was tried, and it failed. It’s now time for us as a nation to think again.
I'd suggest all 'friends of Israel' watch Channel 4 News on the pathetic plight of the Gazans. If anyone thinks it's unreasonable to compare the Israeli regime to the apartheid one in South Africa I would say it is. It's unfair to the South Africans. It's a complete disgrace that the world watches and does nothing
Whilst I agree that the plight of the Palestinians is terrible, South Africa was not surrounded by countries who wanted it wiped from the face of the earth.
It's like the Junior Common Room of Tory Central Office in here most nights, tonight being a prime example. The juvenile hubris is palpable.
This is a far more important issue than Corbyn's plunging popularity with huge sections of the country.
Please carry on with this focus.
Chortle. No doubt we can blame it on 'papism', like most things eh?
Given how the last local election has given us pause for thought in regard to believing polls again (overestimated Labour in London) I’m surprised that we are still taking polls as gospel. After last week’s results, I’m not going to be left with egg on my face because I spent time paying attention to polling that turned out to be rubbish come Election Day, as has been the case in 2015, 2017, and now this year. Three times is enough to learn, no matter how tempting it may be to analyse the latest polling results.
Trusting any one poll is unreliable but when Labour has had only 2 leads in the last 20 polls the general trend is probably worth taking seriously.
IIRC there were several polls (over several months) which indicated Labour were going to do much better in London than they actually did, so I think that qualifies as a trend that turned out to be a bit misleading. Then there was last year, in which the trend towards the end of the GE indicated a Tory majority, or in 2015 which indicated that we’d have a hung parliament. I’ve been taking polls seriously over the last several months but the London pollls have shown that polling still has issues, so I’ll be waiting to see what any elections show us.
I've long doubted the accuracy of London polling - sampling is difficult to get balanced in such a tight geographical area.
I'd suggest all 'friends of Israel' watch Channel 4 News on the pathetic plight of the Gazans. If anyone thinks it's unreasonable to compare the Israeli regime to the apartheid one in South Africa I would say it is. It's unfair to the South Africans. It's a complete disgrace that the world watches and does nothing
Whilst I agree that the plight of the Palestinians is terrible, South Africa was not surrounded by countries who wanted it wiped from the face of the earth.
So that makes it OK. And what has got to do with annexing other people's orchards and stealing their water.
I'd suggest all 'friends of Israel' watch Channel 4 News on the pathetic plight of the Gazans. If anyone thinks it's unreasonable to compare the Israeli regime to the apartheid one in South Africa I would say it is. It's unfair to the South Africans. It's a complete disgrace that the world watches and does nothing
Whilst I agree that the plight of the Palestinians is terrible, South Africa was not surrounded by countries who wanted it wiped from the face of the earth.
I think it sort of was. They even called the neighbouring countries the front line states. I would say the parallels are pretty close. Let's hope that extends to a fairly peaceful solution.
Getting pretty fed up with how hard it is to load the comments on my laptop. Reduced to using my phone. It has got a lot worse over the last couple of days.
It does baffle me how temperamental Vanilla forums is. No other forum I belong to is as unreliable. What's the deal Mike, why do you stick with Vanilla as the platform for PB?
Getting pretty fed up with how hard it is to load the comments on my laptop. Reduced to using my phone. It has got a lot worse over the last couple of days.
Firefox and chrome both fine for me - not used IE for years.
Getting pretty fed up with how hard it is to load the comments on my laptop. Reduced to using my phone. It has got a lot worse over the last couple of days.
It does baffle me how temperamental Vanilla forums is. No other forum I belong to is as unreliable. What's the deal Mike, why do you stick with Vanilla as the platform for PB?
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
Yes.
The point is this. We voted narrowly to leave the EU. We didn’t vote to become North Korea.
Our policy has to address the fact that a very large minority - even a majority, if you believe polling, actually wanted to stay in the EU and presumably wish to retain strong economic, security and cultural links.
Moreover we can’t ignore the EU anyway. Policy has to recognise that we are now a middle power right on the doorstep of a trade superpower, and one which still takes nearly 50% of our exports.
But surely if Corbyn wins the next election and enacts his policies his supporters won't be saying "well 60% of people didn't vote for us so we'll only nationalise a couple of things, and we won't do a lot of the things we have put in the manifesto because most people didn't vote for us"
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
Yes.
The point is this. We voted narrowly to leave the EU. We didn’t vote to become North Korea.
Our policy has to address the fact that a very large minority - even a majority, if you believe polling, actually wanted to stay in the EU and presumably wish to retain strong economic, security and cultural links.
Moreover we can’t ignore the EU anyway. Policy has to recognise that we are now a middle power right on the doorstep of a trade superpower, and one which still takes nearly 50% of our exports.
But surely if Corbyn wins the next election and enacts his policies his supporters won't be saying "well 60% of people didn't vote for us so we'll only nationalise a couple of things, and we won't do a lot of the things we have put in the manifesto because most people didn't vote for us"
The obvious question is what would have happened if remain had won 52-48. Nothing. In fact, integration would have probably proceeded, despite the wishes of 48% to leave.
Do SpaceX harbour ambitions to colonize Mars (just looking at the thumbnail)? I thought that was Weyland-Yutani's job.
I'm not sure it's quite accurate to say they want to colonise Mars: they want to provide the transport system that would allow Mars to be colonised. The actual colonisation, and the messy stuff like governance, would be looked after by others.
Meanwhile here’s an interesting and set of some alternative takes to what Matthew Goodwin saying here, in this discussion (clicking the tweet will allow you to see the overall discussion as opposed to just one tweet): https://twitter.com/cjayanetti/status/993080318319087616?s=20
However, the long-term demographic trend IS towards growth of the cities and relative shrinking of the small towns - the opposite of how it was from the 50s to the 90s - which should mean, this redrawing or next, a redrawing in favour of labour; or at least less unfavourable to labour than these things have been historically.
I don't think small towns are shrinking, even relatively speaking.
I'd suggest all 'friends of Israel' watch Channel 4 News on the pathetic plight of the Gazans. If anyone thinks it's unreasonable to compare the Israeli regime to the apartheid one in South Africa I would say it is. It's unfair to the South Africans. It's a complete disgrace that the world watches and does nothing
Whilst I agree that the plight of the Palestinians is terrible, South Africa was not surrounded by countries who wanted it wiped from the face of the earth.
I think it sort of was. They even called the neighbouring countries the front line states. I would say the parallels are pretty close. Let's hope that extends to a fairly peaceful solution.
South Africa airways had to fly over the sea during apartheid times as no other mainland African countries would allow them to fly over their airspace IIRC. So I agree, they were sort of "surrounded".
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
No William. The option to leave is still open. Indeed, it is still going to happen whether or not you and I like it. If South Sudan could break away from the North, Kosovo from Yugoslavia and Crimea from Ukraine, we can leave the EU.
The question is not whether it will happen but how much damage it will do. On that subject, I am starting to wonder if Europe has thought through the consequences of its high-handedness and blatant bad faith. If it was trying to provoke us into UDI and all-out war, it's going the right way about it, but I can't believe even somebody as stupid as Barnier would be doing that deliberately.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
Yes.
The point is this. We voted narrowly to leave the EU. We didn’t vote to become North Korea.
Our policy has to address the fact that a very large minority - even a majority, if you believe polling, actually wanted to stay in the EU and presumably wish to retain strong economic, security and cultural links.
Moreover we can’t ignore the EU anyway. Policy has to recognise that we are now a middle power right on the doorstep of a trade superpower, and one which still takes nearly 50% of our exports.
But surely if Corbyn wins the next election and enacts his policies his supporters won't be saying "well 60% of people didn't vote for us so we'll only nationalise a couple of things, and we won't do a lot of the things we have put in the manifesto because most people didn't vote for us"
But if his plans hit the buffers you’d expect him to be viguously opposed and possibly forced to change course.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
You mean, if it turns out to be impossible to leave the EU, then we should knuckle down to the inevitable?
Sorry, the more difficult it is to leave, the more urgently we need to get out. IMHO.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
You mean, if it turns out to be impossible to leave the EU, then we should knuckle down to the inevitable?
Sorry, the more difficult it is to leave, the more urgently we need to get out. IMHO.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
No William. The option to leave is still open. Indeed, it is still going to happen whether or not you and I like it. If South Sudan could break away from the North, Kosovo from Yugoslavia and Crimea from Ukraine, we can leave the EU.
The question is not whether it will happen but how much damage it will do. On that subject, I am starting to wonder if Europe has thought through the consequences of its high-handedness and blatant bad faith. If it was trying to provoke us into UDI and all-out war, it's going the right way about it, but I can't believe even somebody as stupid as Barnier would be doing that deliberately.
There’s a certain type of Remain voter, whom you possibly exemplify, who finds it unfathomable that we cannot execute Brexit on our own terms. Facing up to reality seems to be even more painful for them than for arch Brexiteers. National humiliation awaits and you’d better get used it it.
It's like the Junior Common Room of Tory Central Office in here most nights, tonight being a prime example. The juvenile hubris is palpable.
There are more diehard Remainers on here complaining about Brexit than diehard May fans even if there are few fans of Corbyn either
I don`t think there are any diehard May fans, Mr HYUFD. Not even in the ranks of the Conservative Party. I challenge you to name them!
Someone must approve of her, given these numbers. Or at any rate, disapprove of Corbyn much more.
Well, Mr Sean F, that`s it in a nutshell. The polls ask which do you prefer, out of May and Corbyn, and the answer gets reported as May is best of all possibilities. They really ought to ask who is the best leader: May, Corbyn or somebody else? I have a feeling that somebody else would win hands down.
Thanks to those who named diehard May fans - who seem to boil down to Mr Big G, Mr Mortimer and Miss Vance. But all of these have, I think, been critical from time to time. I come to the conclusion that nobody at all really loves Mrs May.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
You mean, if it turns out to be impossible to leave the EU, then we should knuckle down to the inevitable?
Sorry, the more difficult it is to leave, the more urgently we need to get out. IMHO.
This is hysterical and unserious. How easy do you think it would be to leave the WTO and try to regenotioate the basis of trade relations with the rest of the world? Interdependence is a fact of life, not something to fear and try to escape like a runaway bride.
I've been thinking about a number of posts I've seen on here In the last few days. I have noticed the argument that that the EU referendum was close therefore we should not enact it fully, I.e. Stay in some sort of close relationship with EU. Whilst I voted remain, it does not mean that I support a watered down Half in half out version if we cannot make it work. I.e. The worst of all worlds, surely we voted leave, then we do everything to leave and anything we can keep by negotiation then great, but I don't think there is a halfway house.
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
You might be. Your analogies are not great ones... a lot of the argument at the moment seems to be should we have a relationship with the EU that is like that of Switzerland?, or Norway?, or Canada?, or Turkey?, or Singapore?...
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
The future relationship though relies on what the EU allow us to have . I guess I just strongly believe in democracy, and most people seems to interpret the result according to their initial preference.
If the first preference of the people who voted Leave is not available, we need to think again. There is no solution without a new referendum to give a new mandate.
You mean, if it turns out to be impossible to leave the EU, then we should knuckle down to the inevitable?
Sorry, the more difficult it is to leave, the more urgently we need to get out. IMHO.
This is hysterical and unserious. How easy do you think it would be to leave the WTO and try to regenotioate the basis of trade relations with the rest of the world? Interdependence is a fact of life, not something to fear and try to escape like a runaway bride.
Funny then how Ireland left the U.K. nearly 100 years ago. A much closer relationship then than we have with the EU now.
There’s a certain type of Remain voter, whom you possibly exemplify, who finds it unfathomable that we cannot execute Brexit on our own terms. Facing up to reality seems to be even more painful for them than for arch Brexiteers. National humiliation awaits and you’d better get used it it.
No William. This is not about the terms. This is about the fact we have lost. And with respect, you are the one who seems to find that simple truth unfathomable. I would further add that misguided abuse and/or wilful misunderstanding of posters who point this out merely demeans you and leaves you severely lacking in credibility.
Edit - of course you do typify the attitude of the EU, who also apparently can't get their admittedly rather empty heads round the fact we're leaving and the world won't actually end as a result however painful for both of us in the short term. What I can't understand is why they're so anxious to inflict a punishment beating on us that not only dramatically increases the risks to themselves but effectively rules out the possibility of us ever rejoining.
There’s a certain type of Remain voter, whom you possibly exemplify, who finds it unfathomable that we cannot execute Brexit on our own terms. Facing up to reality seems to be even more painful for them than for arch Brexiteers. National humiliation awaits and you’d better get used it it.
No William. This is not about the terms. This is about the fact we have lost. And with respect, you are the one who seems to find that simple truth unfathomable. And I would add that misguided abuse and/or wilful misunderstanding of posters who point this out merely demeans you.
I’m not the one talking about “UDI all out war” with the EU. This is just bovine jingoism.
There’s a certain type of Remain voter, whom you possibly exemplify, who finds it unfathomable that we cannot execute Brexit on our own terms. Facing up to reality seems to be even more painful for them than for arch Brexiteers. National humiliation awaits and you’d better get used it it.
No William. This is not about the terms. This is about the fact we have lost. And with respect, you are the one who seems to find that simple truth unfathomable. And I would add that misguided abuse and/or wilful misunderstanding of posters who point this out merely demeans you.
I’m not the one talking about “UDI all out war” with the EU. This is just bovine jingoism.
No William, again. I said that that was what they seemed to want. I am not saying that is what I want.
Have you ever wondered why people hold you in such contempt? You, and Bromptonaut, and ScottP, who are apparently unable to read plain English and resort to nasty personal abuse when your errors are pointed out - well, bluntly the three of you don't add to the quality of discussion.
There’s a certain type of Remain voter, whom you possibly exemplify, who finds it unfathomable that we cannot execute Brexit on our own terms. Facing up to reality seems to be even more painful for them than for arch Brexiteers. National humiliation awaits and you’d better get used it it.
No William. This is not about the terms. This is about the fact we have lost. And with respect, you are the one who seems to find that simple truth unfathomable. I would further add that misguided abuse and/or wilful misunderstanding of posters who point this out merely demeans you and leaves you severely lacking in credibility.
Isn't the point surely that, though we can leave, and leave easily, we can't leave and retain all the trading and other benefits of staying?
And the problem for the government is that if we adopt a hard-brexit there will probably be a significant negative impact on the economy, at least for the next few years. Come the next GE, will the electorate as a whole blame the EU for a poor economy... or the government?
Comments
In a couple of hours SpaceX may launch a rocket, and attempt to land the first stage on a barge at sea.
This is a notable launch, as it is the first launch of their 'final' block-V variant of the Falcon 9.
Watch at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYJWeK-kVB0
They are planning to make a very large rocket to fulfil this aim:
http://www.spacex.com/mars
Though I feel they're rather glossing over how involved they'd have to get with the 'colonisation' (itself a loaded word in some quarters).
If we had had a referendum on the death penalty, and death penalty won, there would be no middle negotiated point, or if we had had a referendum on joining the Euro we wouldn't have had the Euro for some things but pounds for other things to keep the forty eight percent happy. Am I the only person who sees it like this?
The point is this. We voted narrowly to leave the EU. We didn’t vote to become North Korea.
Our policy has to address the fact that a very large minority - even a majority, if you believe polling, actually wanted to stay in the EU and presumably wish to retain strong economic, security and cultural links.
Moreover we can’t ignore the EU anyway. Policy has to recognise that we are now a middle power right on the doorstep of a trade superpower, and one which still takes nearly 50% of our exports.
One thing all these countries have in common is that none of them are in the EU - i.e. we could emulate any of of them and still fulfill the mandate of leaving the EU. That's why there's a lot to argue over imo.
Who knew at that time what would happen if a British Prime Minister stood up the week before Trump’s inauguration to announce we were going to leave the EU fully, including the single market and customs union? It could have set off a dominoe effect or Brussels could have been so desperate to keep the EU on the road they offered some fabulous deal to get it done quickly and avoid any contagion.
It was tried, and it failed. It’s now time for us as a nation to think again.
I am pretty certain he is an alien. "Elon Musk" is even lamer than "Ford Prefect" as an attempt to guess what an earthling might credibly be called.
http://know-tax.com/social-care-in-politics-no-good-deed-goes-unpunished
It is very interesting, and worth reading.
The question is not whether it will happen but how much damage it will do. On that subject, I am starting to wonder if Europe has thought through the consequences of its high-handedness and blatant bad faith. If it was trying to provoke us into UDI and all-out war, it's going the right way about it, but I can't believe even somebody as stupid as Barnier would be doing that deliberately.
Sorry, the more difficult it is to leave, the more urgently we need to get out. IMHO.
Thanks to those who named diehard May fans - who seem to boil down to Mr Big G, Mr Mortimer and Miss Vance. But all of these have, I think, been critical from time to time. I come to the conclusion that nobody at all really loves Mrs May.
Apart from that...
Edit - of course you do typify the attitude of the EU, who also apparently can't get their admittedly rather empty heads round the fact we're leaving and the world won't actually end as a result however painful for both of us in the short term. What I can't understand is why they're so anxious to inflict a punishment beating on us that not only dramatically increases the risks to themselves but effectively rules out the possibility of us ever rejoining.
NEW THREAD
Have you ever wondered why people hold you in such contempt? You, and Bromptonaut, and ScottP, who are apparently unable to read plain English and resort to nasty personal abuse when your errors are pointed out - well, bluntly the three of you don't add to the quality of discussion.
And the problem for the government is that if we adopt a hard-brexit there will probably be a significant negative impact on the economy, at least for the next few years. Come the next GE, will the electorate as a whole blame the EU for a poor economy... or the government?