The main lesson for politicians is not to be honest during an election campaign in future. May was honest on everything and did badly.
The Leave campaign lied and cheated, and won!
While Remain lied and cheated, and lost!
Did you assure anyone outside this forum that the EMA would be unaffected by Brexit? I hope you've managed to salvage the damage to your personal brand from this rookie mistake.
You are very similar to tim, formerly of this parish, in many ways. It's really very odd. You are focused on "gotcha" points which are unimportant to the debate.
I made a valid point that cooperation in medical approvals was a good thing, and there is no reason why it should be affected by Brexit.
I did make a small factual error in that I didn't realise that the rules of the EMA required a member of the EMA to be an EU member.
Clearly that is something which could be negotiated with goodwill and common sense on both sides.
Considering this site doesn't normally quit talking about Brexit I'm surprised more isn't made of Barnier rejecting Chequers on customs.
Considering that customs and thus Ireland has been the major divide recently an out and out rejection of Chequers as he's done today seems to be significant.
Though I note he has waited until the summer recess before doing that. He is a sly fox.
It was dead the moment Mrs May surrendered to the ERG and accepted their amendments.
People were already saying it was dead before then, don't give too much credit to the ERG.
In the Withdrawal Agreement, it's going to be EEA+CU (but using different terminology).
When it comes to the meaningful vote, it will be something like 250 for, 75 against, 300 abstentions.
I don't have a problem generally with an abstention, but on such a significant issue so many would be such a piss take.
Abstentions wouldn't be a piss take but the result of careful deliberations and calculations.
I think you misunderstand me. That it is the result of careful deliberations and calculations is why I would find mass abstention to be such a piss take. Because it would be about cynical partisan considerations (not that I expect the Tories would behave differently were roles reversed), trumping taking an active position on whether it was good or bad.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
People will be too busy queuing for front row seats to watch parliament trying to pass legislation that would necessitate one.
Except that:
1. The legislation required for the UK to leave the EU has already been passed.
2. The UK and the EU have very different ideas of what constitutes a border. We don’t really care what passes North, how efficient the technology is at collecting tarrifs or checking goods for compliance with standards.
A customs border would be a requirement of WTO membership, no? However it's perfectly obvious that the EU likes a degree of protection and I've always found the 'we want control of our borders but not in Ireland' argument strange.
Control doesn't mean stopping everything. It means choice.
The UK might well say that we would have tighter controls in general but, because of the history of Northern Ireland, we'd opt to treat them as a special case.
That's a valid choice and a way of exercising decision making control
Not a matter of concern. Even if there's no deal AND the apocalyptic scare stories actually turn out to have some validity this time around, we're not about to starve to death. Besides anything else a lot of the neighbours own cats and I'm sure I can fashion some sort of rudimentary net with which to capture them.
Although if it does look like no deal then I may also dust off my Emergency Corbyn Government Readiness List and buy some of the essentials. There's not that much room for hoarding in Chez Overall, but I think I can find space for three dozen luxury loo rolls, a couple of cases of Rioja, some basic medicines and, say, about 10kg of good quality chocolate. Sorted.
Don't drink Cat milk.
Oh come on, be serious! I'm not going to milk the things, now am I?
I was thinking more along the lines of a casserole.
Considering this site doesn't normally quit talking about Brexit I'm surprised more isn't made of Barnier rejecting Chequers on customs.
Considering that customs and thus Ireland has been the major divide recently an out and out rejection of Chequers as he's done today seems to be significant.
Though I note he has waited until the summer recess before doing that. He is a sly fox.
It was dead the moment Mrs May surrendered to the ERG and accepted their amendments.
People were already saying it was dead before then, don't give too much credit to the ERG.
In the Withdrawal Agreement, it's going to be EEA+CU (but using different terminology).
When it comes to the meaningful vote, it will be something like 250 for, 75 against, 300 abstentions.
If you're right then I think the Conservative Party will probably self-destruct and we'll get a Corbyn Government. Under such circumstances the Tories would've failed utterly, in which case good riddance to the lot of them.
They don't need to be purged for the same reason. Tonight shows how a group can try to force out anyone who fails to comply with group think.
Not sure which part of the groupthink she is out of step with?
She supports Brexit almost as much as Jezza...
Maybe so, but he is playing a relatively smart game on Brexit to appeal to as wide a target as possible (I will never, ever, forget that some praise him for 'masterly inactivity' on the subject, for all it is smart politics), while she's just voting her conscience I presume.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Should or else what?
Nothing? otherwise they'd have used the same language.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Well if the rozzers pursue this avenue it will make for an interesting test case.
I do know that all the major parties took legal advice in 2010 and 2015 that any online campaigning should have an imprint on it.
Failure to do so ran the risk of getting them into trouble.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Should or else what?
I cannot say I'd be comfortable with people not having to use imprints, but there is surely a big legal difference between must and should, and if it is correct it only says should, then how can there be punishment for something optional?
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Should or else what?
I cannot say I'd be comfortable with people not having to use imprints, but there is surely a big legal difference between must and should, and if it is correct it only says should, then how can there be punishment for something optional?
In the advice they say: "As good practice, we recommend that you should put an imprint on electronic material"
No way is that a legal requirement. It's much like the difference between must and should in the highway code
Certain rules in the Highway Code are legal requirements and are identified by the words ‘must’ or ‘must not’. In these cases, the rules also include references to the corresponding legislation. Offenders may be cautioned, given licence penalty points, fined, banned from driving, or imprisoned, depending on the severity of the offence. Although failure to comply with the other rules would not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, the Highway Code may be used in court under the Road Traffic Act to establish liability. These include advisory rules with wording ‘should’ and ‘should not’ or ‘do’ and ‘do not’. In general, only the latest official printed version of the Highway Code should be used but in legal proceedings, whether civil or criminal, the version current at the time of the incident would apply.
Why am I not surprised she didn't check such a basic fact.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Well if the rozzers pursue this avenue it will make for an interesting test case.
I do know that all the major parties took legal advice in 2010 and 2015 that any online campaigning should have an imprint on it.
Failure to do so ran the risk of getting them into trouble.
I recall a similar kind of story from around the mayoral elections last year, and a quick google turns up something interesting from a media handbook (albeit for candidates)
The Electoral Commission also recommends that candidates, wherever possible, place an imprint on their electronic materials (i.e. websites, emails and social media platforms), but this is not a legal requirement.
Perhaps there is something in the rules that makes this more of an issue in this particular circumstance, and I would have no objection to their being such a rule, I'm inclined to think it should be a must, but if it ain't a requirement it ain't a requirement. We shall see. I struggle with the idea that if it is not mandatory you can still be punished for not doing it.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Should or else what?
I cannot say I'd be comfortable with people not having to use imprints, but there is surely a big legal difference between must and should, and if it is correct it only says should, then how can there be punishment for something optional?
In the advice they say: "As good practice, we recommend that you should put an imprint on electronic material"
What would the imprint for this material have said had it been there?
Most of this lot only left the Eastern bloc in 1989, lest we forget. Four in ten now back far Right or ex-Communists (and the Centre-Left appears perilously close to being Pasokified to boot.)
Just to add one thing: Linke (and its predecessor the PDS) have always been very strong in the former GDR. If you go back to the elections in the mid-90s, particularly the state elections, it would frequently pick up a quarter to a third of the votes.
It's amazing how popular the far left still are in eastern Germany. A case of Stockholm Syndrome if ever there was one.
Is this news? I recall it being mentioned during the campaign.
It looks like Matthew Elliott's Brexit Central was also pumping out anonymous Facebook ads during the campaign. twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
You aren't allowed to tweet images with slogans during the campaign? She's almost hysterical.
Not without imprints.
The electoral commission advice says you must use an imprint for printed leaflets, but should use one for online advertising. Probably because the Act itself only talks about printed material.
Should or else what?
I cannot say I'd be comfortable with people not having to use imprints, but there is surely a big legal difference between must and should, and if it is correct it only says should, then how can there be punishment for something optional?
In the advice they say: "As good practice, we recommend that you should put an imprint on electronic material"
What would the imprint for this material have said had it been there?
Considering this site doesn't normally quit talking about Brexit I'm surprised more isn't made of Barnier rejecting Chequers on customs.
Considering that customs and thus Ireland has been the major divide recently an out and out rejection of Chequers as he's done today seems to be significant.
Though I note he has waited until the summer recess before doing that. He is a sly fox.
It was dead the moment Mrs May surrendered to the ERG and accepted their amendments.
This is bordering on delusional. The ERG didn’t amend May’s plan in any way, although they restricted her ability to climb down further. Barnier just rejected May’s Chequers plan pretty much in full and you want to blame the ERG who had nothing to do with drafting it? Comical.
The Leavers always told you that Soft Brexit was a fantasy. Hopefully you will learn from this.
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Most of this lot only left the Eastern bloc in 1989, lest we forget. Four in ten now back far Right or ex-Communists (and the Centre-Left appears perilously close to being Pasokified to boot.)
Just to add one thing: Linke (and its predecessor the PDS) have always been very strong in the former GDR. If you go back to the elections in the mid-90s, particularly the state elections, it would frequently pick up a quarter to a third of the votes.
It's amazing how popular the far left still are in eastern Germany. A case of Stockholm Syndrome if ever there was one.
Not really - we tend to think of the old east bloc as unmitigatedly horrid, especially in view of the Stasi and the Wall, but I know several people there who say they're well aware of the downsides and don't want the GDR back but they felt more secure in the GDR and trust the Linke to look after them better than the western-based parties. The ex-Communists did very well in Poland and Hungary too before they blotted their copybooks with various blunders.
By contrast, the Swedish Left party referred to elsewhere on this thread is the original Eurocommunist party - before the Italians coined the term, they broke with Moscow and all ideas of revolution or dictatorship, and under the mild-mannered C H Hermansson (whose polite style was rather like Corbyn) did quite well. I was a big fan when I was growing up in neighbouring Denmark (where the Communists were much more the old-style model).
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
Poll also finds ' Asked which party they trusted most on asylum and immigration, 22 per cent said the Tories, down 4 points, 20 per cent said Labour, up 2 points, and 17 per cent said Ukip, up 5 points.'
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
It depends whether you ever climb out the rabbit hole:
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
It depends whether you ever climb out the rabbit hole:
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
It depends whether you ever climb out the rabbit hole:
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
It depends whether you ever climb out the rabbit hole:
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
I could write a decent essay on the good points of the EU, though as you might expect many of its strengths have more salience for our continental partners. Sadly though, I must away to my bed - early start tomorrow.
Interesting, but not particularly relevant. Consider the argument that people have just been having over the minutiae of the legalities surrounding the previous referendum. Surely there's not enough time - even if there were a Parliamentary majority in favour, and even if the terms of withdrawal were to be magically concluded during the Summer recess and guillotined through Parliament on the first day back - to pass the required legislation for referendum Mk.2, and for the campaigns to be organised, and for the official campaigns to be designated, and for the campaigning period to be held, and for the vote to take place before the date when we're leaving anyway?
There are also some other small matters to be considered, such as the fact that the departure date is already set in law, we can't extend without the unanimous agreement of the other member states, and they're unlikely to agree given that (a) they want this wrapped up too and (b) it will completely bugger up the European Parliamentary elections if we're not gone and out of the way on schedule.
A second referendum cannot be held - and even if it could it would probably only serve to reinforce entrenched attitudes. And, regardless of which side won, the margin of victory would almost certainly be narrow, and the losers would squeal "Unfair!" and demand a third vote. It's no solution to anything.
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
It depends whether you ever climb out the rabbit hole:
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
When the best you've got to say about your product is "Stick with X - it's less shit than Y" then you can hardly expect people to be enthusiastic about it.
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
Yes. 'Vote Remain in the second referendum or never eat a sandwich again' is not resonating as well as hoped.
Well, it's all so bloody depressing isn't it? Hardly anybody seems to have a good word to say about the EU, even amongst its supporters. It's all 'do what we want or you'll die of starvation' and variants thereof, like we're all so many little shopkeepers being ordered to hand over a cut of our earnings to a Mafia protection racket.
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
It depends whether you ever climb out the rabbit hole:
A few tens of thousands out of 65 million, all scraped together from around the country and assembled in one place.
Compare with the last European Parliamentary election, where Ukip topped the poll as an anti-EU one-trick pony. The nearest thing it had to a mirror image, the Liberal Democrats, were almost completely wiped out.
And, regardless of which side won, the margin of victory would almost certainly be narrow
There's nothing certain about that. I think it's far more likely to be a decisive majority.
Why? If it's In/Out there's no reason to suppose the result will be very different to the first time, and if it's 'Crap Version of the EU (wait for the OAPs to die off then Rejoin in a few years)' versus 'No Deal' then it'll be as good as In/Out again anyway, so ditto.
Most of this lot only left the Eastern bloc in 1989, lest we forget. Four in ten now back far Right or ex-Communists (and the Centre-Left appears perilously close to being Pasokified to boot.)
Just to add one thing: Linke (and its predecessor the PDS) have always been very strong in the former GDR. If you go back to the elections in the mid-90s, particularly the state elections, it would frequently pick up a quarter to a third of the votes.
It's amazing how popular the far left still are in eastern Germany. A case of Stockholm Syndrome if ever there was one.
Not really - we tend to think of the old east bloc as unmitigatedly horrid, especially in view of the Stasi and the Wall, but I know several people there who say they're well aware of the downsides and don't want the GDR back but they felt more secure in the GDR and trust the Linke to look after them better than the western-based parties. The ex-Communists did very well in Poland and Hungary too before they blotted their copybooks with various blunders.
By contrast, the Swedish Left party referred to elsewhere on this thread is the original Eurocommunist party - before the Italians coined the term, they broke with Moscow and all ideas of revolution or dictatorship, and under the mild-mannered C H Hermansson (whose polite style was rather like Corbyn) did quite well. I was a big fan when I was growing up in neighbouring Denmark (where the Communists were much more the old-style model).
Really ought to be in bed by now, but this filthy weather makes sleeping impossible. At least until you're so dog-tired that you nod off regardless
In other news, I read that the average price of a house in London is now 13 times the salary of the average twentysomething Londoner, and that household indebtedness in the UK is at the highest level recorded. This must be Mrs May's "Country that works for everyone (provided that you're a wealthy pensioner with your own house or someone earning at least a six-figure salary, otherwise fuck off.)" A Labour leadership running on a Left-wing platform, but without the Corbyn tendency's divisive attitudes and toxic baggage, could wipe the floor with this useless Government. As it is, they're still more-or-less level-pegging in the polls, and relying on the Conservative Party to shake itself to pieces.
So we can stop pretending the eu can be comvinced and move on to no deal? No point even going the referendum route if no deal is going to even be provisionally agreed.
Why not go for a slowish transition to CETA?
The customs union doesn’t have a majority in Parliament. But leaving it does.
Because that means a customs border between Northern Ireland and Great Britain, and because it would decimate the economy.
They should be selling tickets to watch Barnier, Junker and Varakdar trying to build a border across Ireland. It’s going to be very amusing to see them try.
People will be too busy queuing for front row seats to watch parliament trying to pass legislation that would necessitate one.
Except that:
1. The legislation required for the UK to leave the EU has already been passed.
2. The UK and the EU have very different ideas of what constitutes a border. We don’t really care what passes North, how efficient the technology is at collecting tarrifs or checking goods for compliance with standards.
A customs border would be a requirement of WTO membership, no? However it's perfectly obvious that the EU likes a degree of protection and I've always found the 'we want control of our borders but not in Ireland' argument strange.
Control doesn't mean stopping everything. It means choice.
The UK might well say that we would have tighter controls in general but, because of the history of Northern Ireland, we'd opt to treat them as a special case.
That's a valid choice and a way of exercising decision making control
Choices are only free if made voluntarily. It's difficult to believe that the UK government's decisions (if we may grace their behavior with that word) are voluntary.
Shocking Times headline: Majority now back a second referendum on Brexit terms
Body text more accurate:
The proportion of voters who favour a second Brexit referendum has overtaken those who do not for the first time, a YouGov poll for The Times shows.
Voters have not changed sides over the question of EU membership in significant enough numbers to be sure that the result would be different from 2016, however.
Comments
I made a valid point that cooperation in medical approvals was a good thing, and there is no reason why it should be affected by Brexit.
I did make a small factual error in that I didn't realise that the rules of the EMA required a member of the EMA to be an EU member.
Clearly that is something which could be negotiated with goodwill and common sense on both sides.
It may well be good politics, however.
The UK might well say that we would have tighter controls in general but, because of the history of Northern Ireland, we'd opt to treat them as a special case.
That's a valid choice and a way of exercising decision making control
She supports Brexit almost as much as Jezza...
https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1022601766511304704
I wonder if Carole Codswallop will ever move on - surely it's time the Guardian Observer moved her onto a different story?
It could be a holiday ad promoting the Orkney Isles for all I can tell.
Remain spent nearly 50 per cent more than leave and still couldn't win. That is perhaps the most shocking fact. BSE - completely c**p campaign.
Election law 101
Two years on and it would seem that the Continuity Remainers still haven't worked out that Project Fear might not necessarily be the best way to sell what they're offering.
In other news, a good night for OWLS, free or otherwise! nearly.
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1022606843032559621?s=19
Here's the advice: https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/166225/fs-imprints-npc.pdf
I do know that all the major parties took legal advice in 2010 and 2015 that any online campaigning should have an imprint on it.
Failure to do so ran the risk of getting them into trouble.
No way is that a legal requirement. It's much like the difference between must and should in the highway code
Certain rules in the Highway Code are legal requirements and are identified by the words ‘must’ or ‘must not’. In these cases, the rules also include references to the corresponding legislation. Offenders may be cautioned, given licence penalty points, fined, banned from driving, or imprisoned, depending on the severity of the offence. Although failure to comply with the other rules would not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, the Highway Code may be used in court under the Road Traffic Act to establish liability. These include advisory rules with wording ‘should’ and ‘should not’ or ‘do’ and ‘do not’. In general, only the latest official printed version of the Highway Code should be used but in legal proceedings, whether civil or criminal, the version current at the time of the incident would apply.
Why am I not surprised she didn't check such a basic fact.
The Electoral Commission also recommends that candidates, wherever possible,
place an imprint on their electronic materials (i.e. websites, emails and social media
platforms), but this is not a legal requirement.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YG9RVhA5HjMJ:www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/223106/May-2017-media-handbook-English-Mayoral-and-local-elections.pdf+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-b-ab
Perhaps there is something in the rules that makes this more of an issue in this particular circumstance, and I would have no objection to their being such a rule, I'm inclined to think it should be a must, but if it ain't a requirement it ain't a requirement. We shall see. I struggle with the idea that if it is not mandatory you can still be punished for not doing it.
I wonder why the change was made for the EURef?
Steve Bannon is eating a salad.
Granted the second sentence seems like a doozy
Steve Bannon is eating a salad. It seems incongruous somehow, like a grizzly bear munching on a falafel, or a honey badger strumming a harp
What is it that attracted the media whore to the former Foreign Secretary?
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/26/polls-walker-wisconsin-michigan-minnesota-governors-714291
The Leavers always told you that Soft Brexit was a fantasy. Hopefully you will learn from this.
"Europe Elects
@EuropeElects
Sweden: Left-wing V (LEFT) reaches 20 year record high in Novus poll: 10.1% (last election: 5.7%). #svpol"
By contrast, the Swedish Left party referred to elsewhere on this thread is the original Eurocommunist party - before the Italians coined the term, they broke with Moscow and all ideas of revolution or dictatorship, and under the mild-mannered C H Hermansson (whose polite style was rather like Corbyn) did quite well. I was a big fan when I was growing up in neighbouring Denmark (where the Communists were much more the old-style model).
No wonder it's so easy to find people who hate the EU and so hard to find people who love it, at least in any great numbers.
Badly 75% (+3)
Well 14% (-2)
Changes since last week.
https://twitter.com/cats2home/status/1022426914500341761?s=19
There are also some other small matters to be considered, such as the fact that the departure date is already set in law, we can't extend without the unanimous agreement of the other member states, and they're unlikely to agree given that (a) they want this wrapped up too and (b) it will completely bugger up the European Parliamentary elections if we're not gone and out of the way on schedule.
A second referendum cannot be held - and even if it could it would probably only serve to reinforce entrenched attitudes. And, regardless of which side won, the margin of victory would almost certainly be narrow, and the losers would squeal "Unfair!" and demand a third vote. It's no solution to anything.
Compare with the last European Parliamentary election, where Ukip topped the poll as an anti-EU one-trick pony. The nearest thing it had to a mirror image, the Liberal Democrats, were almost completely wiped out.
QED
In other news, I read that the average price of a house in London is now 13 times the salary of the average twentysomething Londoner, and that household indebtedness in the UK is at the highest level recorded. This must be Mrs May's "Country that works for everyone (provided that you're a wealthy pensioner with your own house or someone earning at least a six-figure salary, otherwise fuck off.)" A Labour leadership running on a Left-wing platform, but without the Corbyn tendency's divisive attitudes and toxic baggage, could wipe the floor with this useless Government. As it is, they're still more-or-less level-pegging in the polls, and relying on the Conservative Party to shake itself to pieces.
Which may well happen.
https://twitter.com/libe/status/1022518178759487488
https://twitter.com/FPM_Paris/status/1022568991343173651
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDpJdx9dR0k It's called "Arthur". By Rick Wakeman. They used from 1979? to 2005
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsKfRi6kKkc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_C6BEFKJOY
From 2010 they use this one by Richard Blair-Oliphant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pFIdLIHOdk
World soybean import volumes are here :
https://www.statista.com/statistics/612422/soybeans-import-volume-worldwide-by-country/
China is 5x larger than the EU.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pDKgxHGdUc
But you might prefer the Bill Bailey remix
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc9xLvrV_Zw
THIS IS THE BBC! DO NOT LISTEN TO THE OTHERS! THEY ARE THE FALSE PROPHETS!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44975952
So that's a General Election and a referendum then.....
Majority now back a second referendum on Brexit terms
Body text more accurate:
The proportion of voters who favour a second Brexit referendum has overtaken those who do not for the first time, a YouGov poll for The Times shows.
Voters have not changed sides over the question of EU membership in significant enough numbers to be sure that the result would be different from 2016, however.