Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
He's going to resign as PM, and also resign from Parliament, according to the latest reports. His constituency is Wentworth, which includes Bondi Beach and the surrounding area, a very safe Liberal seat.
So at least we'll be spared him taking down the new leader at some point a la Rudd and Gillard.
Turnbull made a very pointed comment (aimed at Abbott no doubt) about former PMs no longer adding value in parliament after they left office......some speculation that he'll stand down close enough to the next GE (due in 8 months) so they don't have to call a by-election.
Abbott feels a bit like what the Tories would have gone through if IDS had ever become PM.....
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
The more Labour supporters have got to see the Tory faces behind Brexit the more the flakey have hardened in their opposition to it. If Corbyn's ambivalence doesn't cause an almighty split at Conference I'll be surprised. His best hope is that the antisemitism noise drowns it out.
Why doesn't he just shift position to supporting a second referendum? If the Tories can scramble a deal through with the help of a few labour rebels then he doesn't have to deliver on the aim - I tried, but we're not in government - and the party can continue to keep on board remainers and leavers since he won't have had to pick a side.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
Unless you are facing deselection... In which case leaving for new party may be an option especially if enough other MPs are also facing deselection...
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
F1: seems Force India has lost all their points. So they're now bottom. But expect them to soon be ahead of Williams, and probably Toro Rosso and Sauber too. May be tricky catching the likes of McLaren, though.
Indian policy in Kashmir Moroccan policy in Western Sahara Burmese policy in Rakhine Chinese policy in Tibet and Xinjiang Russian policy in Crimea Armenian policy in Nagorno Karabakh
So why this tunnel vision regarding Israel?
He's talked about most of those. Google is your friend
That's the reason why Corbynites (and politicians generally) complain of biased media - it's not that they make stuff up, but that they will take a theme and run with it, and simply ignore everything else.
So far as I know, Corbyn hasn't many speeches about Israel or Middle East politics since he became leader, except in response to questions, which have all been of the type "Why did you appear with X N years ago?". Quite rightly, he feels there are other priorities for the LOTO to address. But well-informed PBers, let alone the general public, get the impression that he constantly talks about Israel and ignores all other foreign policy concerns, because that's "the story". And yes, it does get whipped up by people who dislike him for other reasons.
Your observation that media "take a theme and run with it" is certainly true. At one stage it was dangerous dogs at another it was UKIP.
The more Labour supporters have got to see the Tory faces behind Brexit the more the flakey have hardened in their opposition to it. If Corbyn's ambivalence doesn't cause an almighty split at Conference I'll be surprised. His best hope is that the antisemitism noise drowns it out.
Why doesn't he just shift position to supporting a second referendum? If the Tories can scramble a deal through with the help of a few labour rebels then he doesn't have to deliver on the aim - I tried, but we're not in government - and the party can continue to keep on board remainers and leavers since he won't have had to pick a side.
I said that he would, in the end, at some point here in 2017, to howls of derision from across the PB spectrum. Now more than a year on it's starting to look like a matter of not if but when.
Mr. Jessop, I might have already heard something about that. Got a bit cocky and shot himself in the career? Anyway, I'll give the video a look.
It's worse than that. It's hilariously bad.
On the cool-down lap he deliberately collides with his team mate. When going into parc ferme, he is seen wearing one glove and using a mobile phone he had in the car. When called to explain his actions to the stewards, he pi**es off abroad instead.
All of that is bad enough. It gave him a ?4? race ban and got him sacked by his team and management company.
But there's lots of background stuff as well. His team mate is Indian, and allegedly he and his dad would go about speaking in faux-Indian accents. He insinuated his team mate took illegal drugs, and he wanted his car to be painted in a 'Make America Great Again' livery.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
Unless you are facing deselection... In which case leaving for new party may be an option especially if enough other MPs are also facing deselection...
If they wanted to really sabotage things, a deselected MP could do a Jackson and defect to the Tories just before the election on the basis they are less racist, more intelligent, actually care about national security and have done more to help the poor than Labour would.
But only one MP has ever formally crossed the floor from red to blue (excluding National Labour in 1931). Also, given the nature of Corbyn's supporters, they would have to live under armed guard for the rest of their lives.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
That's my point - They tried once, they didn't manage it, and they don't want to try again. The reasons why they don't are as you list - in which case I don't need to hear about how they might leave for realsies next time.
Leaking their unhappiness is fine, many are even on the record about that which I appreciate. But the new party or defections whispers? If there's nothing to be gained by doing so they should stop pretending there is.
And to be clear, I mainly mean they stop because they are boring me with it, I wasn't meaning to trivialize the level of action leaving would be or suggest there are no good reasons to stay.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
They’re absolutely not either/or. Which is why it is so sickening to see fervent Leave advocates piously condemning Jeremy Corbyn while ignoring the mire they themselves wallow in.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
That's my point - They tried once, they didn't manage it, and they don't want to try again. The reasons why they don't are as you list - in which case I don't need to hear about how they might leave for realsies next time.
Leaking their unhappiness is fine, many are even on the record about that which I appreciate. But the new party or defections whispers? If there's nothing to be gained by doing so they should stop pretending there is.
And to be clear, I mainly mean they stop because they are boring me with it, I wasn't meaning to trivialize the level of action leaving would be or suggest there are no good reasons to stay.
Many an unhappy partner has dreamed of the single life without any real intention of leaving the marital bed.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
I think it is important for us all to appreciate that whatever the result of the next election there will not be a majority of MPs voting for far-left policies in parliament.
However, stuff like renationalisation of rail franchises and public utilities ain't far-left.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
Things not always being either/or has long escaped the comprehension of some very intelligent people somehow, including pretending people are responsible for 100% of comments on one side even if actively disavowed
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
Unless you are facing deselection... In which case leaving for new party may be an option especially if enough other MPs are also facing deselection...
If they wanted to really sabotage things, a deselected MP could do a Jackson and defect to the Tories just before the election on the basis they are less racist, more intelligent, actually care about national security and have done more to help the poor than Labour would.
But only one MP has ever formally crossed the floor from red to blue (excluding National Labour in 1931). Also, given the nature of Corbyn's supporters, they would have to live under armed guard for the rest of their lives.
So it seems unlikely.
I was wondering if they hang on and if Corbyn does enough at next election to form a government, they all immediately resign the whip. Be terminal for the career. The other option to consider is can they use the Co-Op party and make it distinct from the main :Labour party. Then they have the systems and resources in place.
Saw a snippet of an article on Twitter yesterday. Apparently Labour are worried one MP going could start an avalanche of desertions. But that just reminds me of the Brown coup-that-wasn't, when Purnell resigned and then nobody else did. Nobody wants to be first.
At what point does the excuse of 'fighting for their party' ring hollow? If they go into the next election lined up behind Corbyn, all their complaints and criticisms now are worthless.
Frankly I wish they stop leaking how sad they are all the time. Either they don't really believe what they are saying, or they think despite it Corbyn should be PM and they will just oppose the bits of him they don't like within the party and/or they think the Labour party is more important than how bad Corbyn is.
Either way constant talk if how cross they are just irritates. If like some posters they are deeply concerned about Corbyn for a variety of reasons but the movement is more important and needs them still, they should just say that, not fantasize about splitting.
You're being unfair. Corbyn has been challenged once, he won't be again unless he can be defeated. Instead, MPs exert influence in parliament. Any Corbyn administration would be dependent on PLP votes.
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
That's my point - They tried once, they didn't manage it, and they don't want to try again. The reasons why they don't are as you list - in which case I don't need to hear about how they might leave for realsies next time.
Leaking their unhappiness is fine, many are even on the record about that which I appreciate. But the new party or defections whispers? If there's nothing to be gained by doing so they should stop pretending there is.
And to be clear, I mainly mean they stop because they are boring me with it, I wasn't meaning to trivialize the level of action leaving would be or suggest there are no good reasons to stay.
Many an unhappy partner has dreamed of the single life without any real intention of leaving the marital bed.
They can discuss that with a therapist or friends I guess, not write anonymous messages in the local press about how they plan to do it.
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
So it's classy and smart politics, good stuff.
There was one moment in Gordon Brown's premiership - which let's face it, was otherwise pretty much an unrelieved disaster - where I thought he showed up a thoroughly decent and human side. That was the way he behaved over the death of Ivan Cameron. He was dignified, restrained and made a truly moving speech, which I think was probably born out of the tragic loss of his own daughter.
It was a very human moment, all the more poignant for showing what might have been.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
You make a very fair point. It's worth reminding ourselves of some of the xenophobia of the campaign. Not even subtle by pre war Nazi standards
I was wondering if they hang on and if Corbyn does enough at next election to form a government, they all immediately resign the whip. Be terminal for the career. The other option to consider is can they use the Co-Op party and make it distinct from the main :Labour party. Then they have the systems and resources in place.
It seems a bit unlikely. There are several unabashed Corbynistas and a number of arse lickers tribal labour loyalists among the Co-op's 37 MPs, even if they also include Leslie, Berger and Creasy. Plus I don't think the funding or structure matches that of Labour, and the constitution forbids them from having an actual leader.
It would also royally bugger the Labour government in the Welsh Assembly if there was a split and make them very unpopular from the off (although Alun Davies would probably stay with Labour and demand a cabinet brief like the slimy two faced lying thug he is).
Edit - I am shocked to find Davies still is in the cabinet as of last November. Given the reasons why he was sacked, that's genuinely awful.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Telegraph: Hammond under fire for no-deal warning. The i: New Cabinet rift on UK's plan for no-deal Brexit. Express: What does Hammond think he's playing at? Mail: Eeyore Hammond launches project fear (pt2). Times: Brexit splits in cabinet laid bare by Hammond. Metro: It's a big deal if it's no deal. The Sun: Hamm 'doom' blast at No Deal.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Since the referendum was only advisory, then that technically wouldn't reverse anything. It is parliament that has implemented Brexit.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
If the Leave campaign hasn’t poisoned the body politic, why only yesterday did a leading Conservative MP accuse the Chancellor of the Exchequer of participating in a conspiracy against government policy?
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
You make a very fair point. It's worth reminding ourselves of some of the xenophobia of the campaign. Not even subtle by pre war Nazi standards
Which is your favourite Remain ad espousing the virtues of staying in the EU?
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Do you think the Electoral Commission should investigate this:
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
s aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
If the Leave campaign hasn’t poisoned the body politic, why only yesterday did a leading Conservative MP accuse the Chancellor of the Exchequer of participating in a conspiracy against government policy?
That's called politics
Your hypothesis is that the xenophobic Leave campaign dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
And yet, concern about immigration is declining
And on multiple measures the UK is one of the least racist / anti-semitic countries in Europe.
The Treasury model assumes certain adverse effects from a no deal outcome in that there is more friction in our trade with the EU than there has been hitherto. It starts from the not unreasonable premise that friction in trade is a bad thing and that there will be less of it at the margins resulting in less economic activity as a result. It is noteworthy that these effects are quite small but cumulatively, over a period of 12 years, they might amount to 7.7% of our GDP that we might otherwise have had.
Where this becomes nonsense is that the underlying assumptions are that everything else is the same and unaffected by the change. This is nonsense. We saw this with the projections of unemployment rising by 600k as a result of the leave vote. Instead employment continued to rise. The Treasury explanation for this was, well the Governor and the Treasury took steps to mitigate the effects of the Leave vote so the worst case scenarios did not occur.
Well yes, of course. What is missing from these models is the fact that the UK would take steps to mitigate the effect of our increased frictional trade with the EU. That might be in a currency devaluation so that the costs to our exporters are set off, it might be by seeking trade deals with the rest of the world that were not open to the EU because they had a much broader range of interests to protect. It might be that the government would adapt economic policy, increase investment, sort out our education system, work harder to support exporters, encourage import substitution etc etc.
Once we move away from the path we would have had to have trodden as a member of the EU or with unrestricted access to the SM you are no longer comparing like with like. There are a multitude of things both good and bad that would make such a comparison meaningless.
Does that make this modelling a bit of a waste of time? No. It makes the point that Hammond is making that a deal is better than no deal. I completely agree with him on that and so does the cabinet who have signed up to Chequers. Where this has got silly and ridiculous is to take this as meaning the absence of a deal means our economy will be a certain percentage smaller at some point in the future. It really doesn't.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
That does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
You of all people should know the advantages of a negative advertising in a binary campaign. It wasn't possible for Remain to get down and dirty like Leave because it was the government's campaign and therefore unseemly. Imagine they'd tried these
"That's the reason why Corbynites (and politicians generally) complain of biased media - it's not that they make stuff up, but that they will take a theme and run with it, and simply ignore everything else."
That's true. Once a narrative Is set, the media take it as gospel and will ignore any other explanation. A typical example was the diesel-good, petrol-bad narrative which arose in the nineties. Despite science showing that diesel particulates were dangerous, the carbon dioxide must be reduced at all costs narrative held sway. And as always, the politicians went along with it, ignoring the science, because of the electoral appeal. There are many other examples.
You can blame the media, they like to set the agenda and not be deflected by inconvenient facts, but they are what they are. Science proceeds by challenging the prevailing view, the media proceeds by ignoring it when it's inconvenient. The politicians proceed by following the media's narrative. I think we deserve better, but that would be asking them to jeopardise their career.
The Treasury model assumes certain adverse effects from a no deal outcome in that there is more friction in our trade with the EU than there has been hitherto. It starts from the not unreasonable premise that friction in trade is a bad thing and that there will be less of it at the margins resulting in less economic activity as a result. It is noteworthy that these effects are quite small but cumulatively, over a period of 12 years, they might amount to 7.7% of our GDP that we might otherwise have had.
Where this becomes nonsense is that the underlying assumptions are that everything else is the same and unaffected by the change. This is nonsense. We saw this with the projections of unemployment rising by 600k as a result of the leave vote. Instead employment continued to rise. The Treasury explanation for this was, well the Governor and the Treasury took steps to mitigate the effects of the Leave vote so the worst case scenarios did not occur.
Well yes, of course. What is missing from these models is the fact that the UK would take steps to mitigate the effect of our increased frictional trade with the EU. That might be in a currency devaluation so that the costs to our exporters are set off, it might be by seeking trade deals with the rest of the world that were not open to the EU because they had a much broader range of interests to protect. It might be that the government would adapt economic policy, increase investment, sort out our education system, work harder to support exporters, encourage import substitution etc etc.
Once we move away from the path we would have had to have trodden as a member of the EU or with unrestricted access to the SM you are no longer comparing like with like. There are a multitude of things both good and bad that would make such a comparison meaningless.
Does that make this modelling a bit of a waste of time? No. It makes the point that Hammond is making that a deal is better than no deal. I completely agree with him on that and so does the cabinet who have signed up to Chequers. Where this has got silly and ridiculous is to take this as meaning the absence of a deal means our economy will be a certain percentage smaller at some point in the future. It really doesn't.
Have you ever heard of the term “ceteris paribus”? It appears not.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
If the Leave campaign hasn’t poisoned the body politic, why only yesterday did a leading Conservative MP accuse the Chancellor of the Exchequer of participating in a conspiracy against government policy?
That's called politics
Your hypothesis is that the xenophobic Leave campaign dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
And yet, concern about immigration is declining
Unhinged, paranoid conspiracist politics in the mainstream, unremarkable by its present normality after the referendum campaign. Three years ago he would have been laughed to scorn.
To answer your question, reported concern about immigration is declining, as some pious Leavers pretend that their campaign had nothing to do with xenophobia and virtue signal that they like immigrants really and some Remainers have a genuine renewed appreciation of the value of immigration.
Meanwhile far right terrorism is on the rise, the government is committed to a hard Brexit as a consequence of the referendum campaign and Britain is retreating into a surly insularity.
He's going to resign as PM, and also resign from Parliament, according to the latest reports. His constituency is Wentworth, which includes Bondi Beach and the surrounding area, a very safe Liberal seat.
So at least we'll be spared him taking down the new leader at some point a la Rudd and Gillard.
Before being ousted today Turnbull already took down Abbott after Abbott took down Turnbull after Turnbull took down Nelson and that is just the Liberals not even looking at the Rudd and Turnbull battles
The Treasury model assumes certain adverse effects from a no deal outcome in that there is more friction in our trade with the EU than there has been hitherto. It starts from the not unreasonable premise that friction in trade is a bad thing and that there will be less of it at the margins resulting in less economic activity as a result. It is noteworthy that these effects are quite small but cumulatively, over a period of 12 years, they might amount to 7.7% of our GDP that we might otherwise have had.
Where this becomes nonsense is that the underlying assumptions are that everything else is the same and unaffected by the change. This is nonsense. We saw this with the projections of unemployment rising by 600k as a result of the leave vote. Instead employment continued to rise. The Treasury explanation for this was, well the Governor and the Treasury took steps to mitigate the effects of the Leave vote so the worst case scenarios did not occur.
Well yes, of course. What is missing from these models is the fact that the UK would take steps to mitigate the effect of our increased frictional trade with the EU. That might be in a currency devaluation so that the costs to our exporters are set off, it might be by seeking trade deals with the rest of the world that were not open to the EU because they had a much broader range of interests to protect. It might be that the government would adapt economic policy, increase investment, sort out our education system, work harder to support exporters, encourage import substitution etc etc.
Once we move away from the path we would have had to have trodden as a member of the EU or with unrestricted access to the SM you are no longer comparing like with like. There are a multitude of things both good and bad that would make such a comparison meaningless.
Does that make this modelling a bit of a waste of time? No. It makes the point that Hammond is making that a deal is better than no deal. I completely agree with him on that and so does the cabinet who have signed up to Chequers. Where this has got silly and ridiculous is to take this as meaning the absence of a deal means our economy will be a certain percentage smaller at some point in the future. It really doesn't.
Have you ever heard of the term “ceteris paribus”? It appears not.
Stick to the lawyering, I think.
Yes I have, having studied economics at University, and that is the point I am making. The certeris will not be paribus if we don't get a deal. Things will change for good and bad in unpredictable ways making the comparison meaningless.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
It wasn't possible for Remain to get down and dirty like Leave because it was the government's campaign.
No, it wasn't.
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'.
Take voters key concerns (we know the NHS is high on the list) and promise a better result - you and Mr Meeks only see the 'negative' side of the ad - perhaps voters paid attention to the 'positive' side, a better NHS?
Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
A Roy Morgan poll this week had Morrison almost tied with Shorten on a preferred PM poll, Bishop did best against Shorten, then Turnbull, then Morrison, then Dutton
Julie Bishop (64%) cf. Bill Shorten (36%). Malcolm Turnbull (54%) cf. Bill Shorten (46%). Bill Shorten (50.5%) cf. Scott Morrison (49.5%). Bill Shorten (62%) cf. Peter Dutton (38%).
Morrison led 53 47 with men, Shorten 54 46 with women
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of snip
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Remain spent more than Leave
Is that stat relevant here? My understanding is that campaign finance regulations relate to the scope of expenditure not (just) the volume.
A cynic might think you are parroting meaningless comfort blanket stats again.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
If the Leave campaign hasn’t poisoned the body politic, why only yesterday did a leading Conservative MP accuse the Chancellor of the Exchequer of participating in a conspiracy against government policy?
That's called politics
Your hypothesis is that the xenophobic Leave campaign dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
And yet, concern about immigration is declining
Unhinged, paranoid conspiracist politics in the mainstream, unremarkable by its present normality
The Treasury model assumes certain adverse effects from a no deal outcome in that there is more friction in our trade with the EU than there has been hitherto. It starts from the not unreasonable premise that friction in trade is a bad thing and that there will be less of it at the margins resulting in less economic activity as a result. It is noteworthy that these effects are quite small but cumulatively, over a period of 12 years, they might amount to 7.7% of our GDP that we might otherwise have had.
Where this becomes nonsense is that the underlying assumptions are that everything else is the same and unaffected by the change. This is nonsense. We saw this with the projections of unemployment rising by 600k as a result of the leave vote. Instead employment continued to rise. The Treasury explanation for this was, well the Governor and the Treasury took steps to mitigate the effects of the Leave vote so the worst case scenarios did not occur.
Well yes, of course. What is missing from these models is the fact that the UK would take steps to mitigate the effect of our increased frictional trade with the EU. That might be in a currency devaluation so that the costs to our exporters are set off, it might be by seeking trade deals with the rest of the world that were not open to the EU because they had a much broader range of interests to protect. It might be that the government would adapt economic policy, increase investment, sort out our education system, work harder to support exporters, encourage import substitution etc etc.
Once we move away from the path we would have had to have trodden as a member of the EU or with unrestricted access to the SM you are no longer comparing like with like. There are a multitude of things both good and bad that would make such a comparison meaningless.
Does that make this modelling a bit of a waste of time? No. It makes the point that Hammond is making that a deal is better than no deal. I completely agree with him on that and so does the cabinet who have signed up to Chequers. Where this has got silly and ridiculous is to take this as meaning the absence of a deal means our economy will be a certain percentage smaller at some point in the future. It really doesn't.
Have you ever heard of the term “ceteris paribus”? It appears not.
Stick to the lawyering, I think.
Yes I have, having studied economics at University, and that is the point I am making. The certeris will not be paribus if we don't get a deal. Things will change for good and bad in unpredictable ways making the comparison meaningless.
Your logic suggests that you believe all macroeconomic modelling is futile.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
It wasn't possible for Remain to get down and dirty like Leave because it was the government's campaign.
No, it wasn't.
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'. Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
A very long post to say: “Leave woz better cos it peddled a positive lie”
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'.
Take voters key concerns (we know the NHS is high on the list) and promise a better result - you and Mr Meeks only see the 'negative' side of the ad - perhaps voters paid attention to the 'positive' side, a better NHS?
Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
This nonsense was peddled during the Sindyref too. Saying "The EU is great because it gives us X!" is exactly the same as saying "Leaving the EU would be terrible because we'd lose X". Likewise saying "Leaving the EU would be great because we'd get Y" is exactly the same as saying "Staying in the EU would be terrible because we wouldn't get Y". The distinction between positive and negative makes no sense.
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
A Roy Morgan poll this week had Morrison almost tied with Shorten on a preferred PM poll, Bishop did best against Shorten, then Turnbull, then Morrison, then Dutton
Julie Bishop (64%) cf. Bill Shorten (36%). Malcolm Turnbull (54%) cf. Bill Shorten (46%). Bill Shorten (50.5%) cf. Scott Morrison (49.5%). Bill Shorten (62%) cf. Peter Dutton (38%).
Morrison led 53 47 with men, Shorten 54 46 with women
Morrison led 53 47 with men, Shorten 54 46 with women.
Shorten led with 18-49 year olds, Morrison with over 50s.
91% of LNP voters and 54% of Ind/Other voters (mainly One Nation) preferred Morrison over Shorten, 79% of ALP voters and 89% of Green voters preferred Shorten over Morrison.
By state Morrison was preferred over Shorten in Queensland and NSW while Shorten was preferred over Morrison in Victoria, SA and Tasmania and they were almost tied in WA.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
I'd generally agree with this - but at the moment it's a bit unhelpful. Those most animated are, like myself, Labour people ashamed of what our party has become. And the xenophobia that taints Brexit is a separate type of issue to the leader of one of the main political parties who has been caught being actively racist, having had a history of behaviour that leaves the minority he's been being racist to terrified of him becoming PM.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campe have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
Britain is not embarked on 'long term decline.' Our decline if it came was with the End of Empire in the middle of the last century and the economic malaise of the 1970s.
Brexit or no Brexit we would remain a middle ranking power rather than the superpower we were when we had the British Empire. Just some diehard Remainers would rather Brexit sees us decline so we are more likely to join a Federal EU
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
It wasn't possible for Remain to get down and dirty like Leave because it was the government's campaign.
No, it wasn't.
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'. Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
A very long post to say: “Leave woz better cos it peddled a positive lie”
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Remain spent more than Leave
Is that stat relevant here? My understanding is that campaign finance regulations relate to the scope of expenditure not (just) the volume.
A cynic might think you are parroting meaningless comfort blanket stats again.
There is nothing 'comfort blanket' about it.
The only ones with a complacent 'comfort blanket' were the Remain campaign at the referendum who despite having most of the establishment behind them from the Bank of England to the PM and Chancellor, the Leader of the Opposition, the Times, the BBC and big business and government funded propaganda sheets still managed to lose to Leave
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
The manner in which the EU referendum was lost was that the Remain side would not, could not or did not paint a positive picture of why we should stay in the EU. Instead it was wall to wall Project Fear - very little of which has come to pass. That is the failure which should annoy a supporter of the EU, not one of the aspects of their opponent's campaign.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
It wasn't possible for Remain to get down and dirty like Leave because it was the government's campaign.
No, it wasn't.
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'.
Take voters key concerns (we know the NHS is high on the list) and promise a better result - you and Mr Meeks only see the 'negative' side of the ad - perhaps voters paid attention to the 'positive' side, a better NHS?
Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
If that's what you took from that broadcast the writers/director were more subtle than I gave them credit for. The very strong subtext was being overwhelmed by an alien culture.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But increasing?
Because of campaign finance violations the referendum should be declared void.
Remain spent more than Leave
Is that stat relevant here? My understanding is that campaign finance regulations relate to the scope of expenditure not (just) the volume.
A cynic might think you are parroting meaningless comfort blanket stats again.
There is nothing 'comfort blanket' about it.
The only ones with a complacent 'comfort blanket' were the Remain campaign at the referendum who despite having most of the establishment behind them from the Bank of England to the PM and Chancellor, the Leader of the Opposition, the Times, the BBC and big business and government funded propaganda sheets still managed to lose to Leave
Erm, I didn’t write the above - something gone awry with the technology I think
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I don't get this 'tribal' approach.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I don't get this 'tribal' approach.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
Leave also told lies and broke campaign finance laws.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
It wasn't possible for Remain to get down and dirty like Leave because it was the government's campaign.
No, it wasn't.
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'.
Take voters key concerns (we know the NHS is high on the list) and promise a better result - you and Mr Meeks only see the 'negative' side of the ad - perhaps voters paid attention to the 'positive' side, a better NHS?
Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
If that's what you took from that broadcast the writers/director were more subtle than I gave them credit for. The very strong subtext was being overwhelmed by an alien culture.
Nothing 'subtle' about it - the MAIN TEXT was 'Better NHS if we LEAVE the EU'.
It was the whole side-by-side for goodness sake!
But because some have convinced themselves that 'xenophobic lies won the campaign' thats all they see - not the much bigger picture - and basis of the ad.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I don't get this 'tribal' approach.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
Nothing to do with the bus, Carlotta, it was about the foreigners.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Excuse me but that does not apply to me or to @Southam Observer or many others who have been boring on about Corbyn’s judgment and history since the moment he became a candidate for the Labour leadership, long before the referendum.
And I also disagree that anti-semitism is incidental to the particular strand of the Far Left which now controls Labour. On the contrary, it is central to Corbyn’s world view and rather more significant to the Far Left’s analysis of capitalism than you allow. Read Paul Berman on this aspect.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
You make a very fair point. It's worth reminding ourselves of some of the xenophobia of the campaign. Not even subtle by pre war Nazi standards
Which is your favourite Remain ad espousing the virtues of staying in the EU?
There wasn't one. They tried with the little boy Sam but as i said at the time though it's heart was in the right place it was insipid. The EU was too abstract a concept to fit easily into the type of campaign they were trying to run and fighting fire with fire wasn't an option. The problem was that thanks to the negativity of Cameron and the Tories the Leave campaign had a two year start
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I don't get this 'tribal' approach.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
Leave also told lies and broke campaign finance laws.
Remain also told lies and outspent Leave by over £5million - ignoring the government's £9 million leaflet - taken together Remain spent more than double what Leave spent.
Do you think Leave's finance law breaches invalidates the result?
Incidentally, complaining about how evil and xenophobic people are rather than acknowledging the argument was simply lost (despite having the vast majority of advantages) is not very edifying. You can't learn from mistakes if you refuse to accept their existence.
Cameron's 'Little Englander' comments were cheered by some pro-EU types here, but they backfired (as I, and others, suggested). Likewise Obama's 'back of the queue' nonsense. And the exaggerated nature of Project Wetpants meant that it was easily derided and the more credible and serious potential problems subsequently raised were taken less seriously. More time on EurATOM[sp] and less about overblown stories of everyone being thousands of pounds worse off would've worked far better.
Mind you, I'd still go back to Lisbon. My suspicion is many feared this was the only vote we'd ever get, following Brown reneging upon his manifesto promise for a referendum on Lisbon.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I don't get this 'tribal' approach.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
Leave also told lies and broke campaign finance laws.
Remain also told lies and outspent Leave by over £5million - ignoring the government's £9 million leaflet - taken together Remain spent more than double what Leave spent.
Do you think Leave's finance law breaches invalidates the result?
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I don't get this 'tribal' approach.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
Leave also told lies and broke campaign finance laws.
Remain also told lies and outspent Leave but what's done is done.
"That's the reason why Corbynites (and politicians generally) complain of biased media - it's not that they make stuff up, but that they will take a theme and run with it, and simply ignore everything else."
That's true. Once a narrative Is set, the media take it as gospel and will ignore any other explanation. A typical example was the diesel-good, petrol-bad narrative which arose in the nineties. Despite science showing that diesel particulates were dangerous, the carbon dioxide must be reduced at all costs narrative held sway. And as always, the politicians went along with it, ignoring the science, because of the electoral appeal. There are many other examples.
You can blame the media, they like to set the agenda and not be deflected by inconvenient facts, but they are what they are. Science proceeds by challenging the prevailing view, the media proceeds by ignoring it when it's inconvenient. The politicians proceed by following the media's narrative. I think we deserve better, but that would be asking them to jeopardise their career.
Yes, I actually bought a diesel car in the belief that I was helping the environment.
As a minor politician you have a simple choice: you can talk about the current media theme in a combative way, preferably unhelpful to your colleagues, in which case you'll get blanket coverage, or you can talk about something else and be ignored. I first experienced it within a month of being elected, when the Government hadn't quite decided about the Millennium Dome, but it was known that Mandelson was keen and Blair was inclined to back him. I said we should cancel the project as it was too expensive for what we'd get. I was besieged by media requests - at least 15 within 48 hours. Everyone wanted to give me the chance to express my views.
A few days later, the Government mildly fudged the decision - they'd go ahead but spend less on it. I said I thought it was a reasonable compromise. Interest in reporting that was zero.
Some years later, we had a big local controversy about an open-cast mine in my area. The Guardian had half a page on the Government's "impending betrayal" by allowing it to go ahead. I persuaded the Minister to veto it. I rang the Guardian's environment editor who had written the piece to give him the good news. He wasn't interested at all, and said, "Frankly, if they're not betraying people after all that's not news."
Conservative MPs will tell similar stories. But as Enoch Powell observed, "Politicians who complain about the media are like seamen who complain about the sea." You simply have to work with them. But we shouldn't nourish the illusion that they're a reliable, balanced source.
Leavers reaching for the smelling salts about anti-Semitism is the rankest hypocrisy, given how exuberantly they peddled xenophobic lies in the referendum campaign. Both sides are engaging in pick n mix racism.
On here the most animated posters are those who were very fond of using Islamophobia to further their political goals in the referendum campaign.
If there’s a difference, it’s that xenophobic lies were intrinsic to Leave’s success while the anti-Semitism of the hard left is incidental to their wider programme.
Disliking the lies of the Leave campaign and despising the anti-semitism spread by Labour are not either/or. I view with particular horror the growth of anti-semitism because it is the world’s most ancient hatred, it acts like a canary in the coal-mine and because its effects have so often been murderous, as we have seen in so many recent terrorist acts.
+1 Mr Meeks blinkered monomania on the reasons for the Brexit result cloud otherwise well observed contributions.
You call it monomania. But the manner in which the EU referendum was won is the overwhelmingly most important political fact of the era. It dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
You make a very fair point. It's worth reminding ourselves of some of the xenophobia of the campaign. Not even subtle by pre war Nazi standards
Which is your favourite Remain ad espousing the virtues of staying in the EU?
There wasn't one. They tried with the little boy Sam but as i said at the time though it's heart was in the right place it was insipid. The EU was too abstract a concept to fit easily into the type of campaign they were trying to run and fighting fire with fire wasn't an option. The problem was that thanks to the negativity of Cameron and the Tories the Leave campaign had a two year start
As you know, when neither the client nor the agency believe in the product the chances of getting good advertising are negligible.
So despite being outspent by 2:1, Leave won - the power of advertising, eh?
When my daughter was in her teenage rebel phase, she used the phrase "Get over it." every time she was reprimanded. To be wedged firmly still in the 'denial' phase s worrying, even if you are in good company.
I expected Remain to win. At midnight on referendum day, I assumed they had done (my betting credentials are less acute than yours), and I shook hands with a Remainer friend. I was disappointed but that's democracy.
It may be Armageddon but it's never the end of the world.
I defy anyone, whether filthy Remainer or plucky Brexiteer, to come away after reading 'All Out War' thinking the Remain campaigns were well organised, lucid and coherent. However, fish rot from the head down. At root, Cameron thought the result was in the bag and left it to his incompetent minions to fuck it up.
Mr. M, not read the book but that sounds about right. Cameron was complacent, but, in his defence, I think most of us believed Remain would win and (months out) win pretty handily too. I was expecting 60/40 for Remain for a long time.
For all the vitriol in Australian politics that is a remarkably gracious tribute.
I may be being unfair, but I wonder if he has an eye to the sort of Leftish liberal vote in an election that has to be held within a year and may be held very quickly.
Julie Bishop (64%) cf. Bill Shorten (36%). Malcolm Turnbull (54%) cf. Bill Shorten (46%). Bill Shorten (50.5%) cf. Scott Morrison (49.5%). Bill Shorten (62%) cf. Peter Dutton (38%).
Looks like the Liberals had a narrow escape with Dutton (and missed opportunity with Bishop?)
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I assume Carlotta is the semi-official voice of the Tory party and discount accordingly. Like a more shameless Nabavi.
Mr. M, not read the book but that sounds about right. Cameron was complacent, but, in his defence, I think most of us believed Remain would win and (months out) win pretty handily too. I was expecting 60/40 for Remain for a long time.
There was a large element of said minions not wishing to trouble the boss with bad news (very Japanese: 'We have sunk 13 Leaver carriers and 22 battleships your Majesty'). According to Shipman, Cameron didn't realise that things were going pear-shaped until the last week, hence his impromptu address to the nation on the 21st.
A positive from the Brexit vote is that it provided a marvellous opportunity for different parts of society to understand each others lives. The anger and frustration felt by some who wanted to maintain the status quo are the same emotions that motivated many to vote to Leave. It is probably the closest, outside of illness and bereavement, that comfortably off people will get to understanding what it is like to be genuinely powerless.
It strikes me as surprising that more people who voted to Remain don't pause for thought on what people's lives must be like to make them vote in a way that they find so distasteful, rather than dismiss them as bad people.
I defy anyone, whether filthy Remainer or plucky Brexiteer, to come away after reading 'All Out War' thinking the Remain campaigns were well organised, lucid and coherent. However, fish rot from the head down. At root, Cameron thought the result was in the bag and left it to his incompetent minions to fuck it up.
Who regardless had no comeback when Leave played the foreigner card.
It was clear that Leave would win when, on the Daily Politics on 20th June 2016 Nick Herbert had no answer to Kate Hoey when challenged about immigration were we to stay in the EU.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I assume Carlotta is the semi-official voice of the Tory party and discount accordingly. Like a more shameless Nabavi.
Anyone who thinks our body politic is not thoroughly contaminated needs their head read.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
Indeed. The usually sensible Carlotta needs to book in for head-reading PDQ. Her neobrexitism is affected - it’s clear she doesn’t even believe the crap she is writing.
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
If you really believed this garbage you would have advanced these arguments prior to the referendum. You didn’t, in fact you did the opposite, as I understand it.
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
I assume Carlotta is the semi-official voice of the Tory party and discount accordingly. Like a more shameless Nabavi.
I agree.Was surprised to see Mr Nabavi doing a thread on the Labour Party.
I defy anyone, whether filthy Remainer or plucky Brexiteer, to come away after reading 'All Out War' thinking the Remain campaigns were well organised, lucid and coherent. However, fish rot from the head down. At root, Cameron thought the result was in the bag and left it to his incompetent minions to fuck it up.
Who regardless had no comeback when Leave played the foreigner card.
It was clear that Leave would win when, on the Daily Politics on 20th June 2016 Nick Herbert had no answer to Kate Hoey when challenged about immigration were we to stay in the EU.
That is wot won it.
Buses be damned.
It wasn't clear to me; I threw the towel in on the Tuesday before EUref - there's a post on here to that effect. But I guess we're all wise after the event.
Edited extra bit: Mr. M, I recall that address well. Sheer idiocy from his underlings if that were the case.
Yes, they'll need to start from scratch as they’ll be a new company - but free of any possibility of Vijay Malliya and Subrata Roy spending years dragging them through the courts.
Hulkenburg also with a new engine BTW, he will go to the back as well.
Comments
There is nothing to be gained by flouncing, starting a minor party and securing this dismal government.
Abbott feels a bit like what the Tories would have gone through if IDS had ever become PM.....
And executive power can be used without the need to pass legislation or win votes in Parliament.
At one stage it was dangerous dogs at another it was UKIP.
On the cool-down lap he deliberately collides with his team mate. When going into parc ferme, he is seen wearing one glove and using a mobile phone he had in the car. When called to explain his actions to the stewards, he pi**es off abroad instead.
All of that is bad enough. It gave him a ?4? race ban and got him sacked by his team and management company.
But there's lots of background stuff as well. His team mate is Indian, and allegedly he and his dad would go about speaking in faux-Indian accents. He insinuated his team mate took illegal drugs, and he wanted his car to be painted in a 'Make America Great Again' livery.
But only one MP has ever formally crossed the floor from red to blue (excluding National Labour in 1931). Also, given the nature of Corbyn's supporters, they would have to live under armed guard for the rest of their lives.
So it seems unlikely.
Leaking their unhappiness is fine, many are even on the record about that which I appreciate. But the new party or defections whispers? If there's nothing to be gained by doing so they should stop pretending there is.
And to be clear, I mainly mean they stop because they are boring me with it, I wasn't meaning to trivialize the level of action leaving would be or suggest there are no good reasons to stay.
However, stuff like renationalisation of rail franchises and public utilities ain't far-left.
But Hammond willingly accepting the bollox predictions of the Treasury and OBR suggests he's in agreement with them.
It was a very human moment, all the more poignant for showing what might have been.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtlGN8wVnis
arse lickerstribal labour loyalists among the Co-op's 37 MPs, even if they also include Leslie, Berger and Creasy. Plus I don't think the funding or structure matches that of Labour, and the constitution forbids them from having an actual leader.It would also royally bugger the Labour government in the Welsh Assembly if there was a split and make them very unpopular from the off (although Alun Davies would probably stay with Labour and demand a cabinet brief like the slimy two faced lying thug he is).
Edit - I am shocked to find Davies still is in the cabinet as of last November. Given the reasons why he was sacked, that's genuinely awful.
If the Leave campaign has so poisoned the national body politic, why is concern over immigration declining, not increasing?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
or for that matter cutting off funding of the OBR.
https://twitter.com/TOPPING_PB/status/1032659090617630720
Among these dark Satanic Mills?"
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf
Won't happen, mind.
LDEM: 53.2% (+0.6)
IND: 25.0% (+25.0)
CON: 13.9% (-24.1)
LAB: 7.8% (-1.6)
Liberal Democrat HOLD.
Bromborough (Wirral) result:
LAB: 47.1% (-3.4)
CON: 28.1% (+15.8)
LDEM: 17.1% (+12.8)
IND: 5.5% (-22.0)
GRN: 2.2% (-1.4)
Labour HOLD.
Watton-at-Stone (East Hertfordshire) result:
LDEM: 67.0% (+67.0)
CON: 30.1% (-36.4)
LAB: 2.9% (-8.3)
LDem GAIN from Con.
No UKIP (-14.7) and Grn (-7.7) as prev.
Newton Regis & Warton (North Warwickshire) result:
CON: 52.2% (-0.7)
LAB: 47.8% (+21.5)
Conservative HOLD.
No UKIP (-20.8) as prev.
Halewood South (Knowsley) result:
LAB: 51.6% (-0.8)
IND: 39.7% (+39.7)
LDEM: 6.0% (+6.0)
CON: 2.8% (-5.7)
Labour HOLD.
No (other) Ind (-21.8) and TUSC (-17.3) as prev.
Gotham (Rushcliffe) result:
CON: 40.4% (-12.5)
LAB: 31.3% (+7.4)
IND: 18.2% (+18.2)
LDEM: 7.2% (+7.2)
GRN: 2.8% (+2.8)
Conservative HOLD.
No UKIP (-23.1) as prev.
Your hypothesis is that the xenophobic Leave campaign dictates so much of the current political landscape, including the long term decline which Britain is now firmly embarked upon.
And yet, concern about immigration is declining
And on multiple measures the UK is one of the least racist / anti-semitic countries in Europe.
Where this becomes nonsense is that the underlying assumptions are that everything else is the same and unaffected by the change. This is nonsense. We saw this with the projections of unemployment rising by 600k as a result of the leave vote. Instead employment continued to rise. The Treasury explanation for this was, well the Governor and the Treasury took steps to mitigate the effects of the Leave vote so the worst case scenarios did not occur.
Well yes, of course. What is missing from these models is the fact that the UK would take steps to mitigate the effect of our increased frictional trade with the EU. That might be in a currency devaluation so that the costs to our exporters are set off, it might be by seeking trade deals with the rest of the world that were not open to the EU because they had a much broader range of interests to protect. It might be that the government would adapt economic policy, increase investment, sort out our education system, work harder to support exporters, encourage import substitution etc etc.
Once we move away from the path we would have had to have trodden as a member of the EU or with unrestricted access to the SM you are no longer comparing like with like. There are a multitude of things both good and bad that would make such a comparison meaningless.
Does that make this modelling a bit of a waste of time? No. It makes the point that Hammond is making that a deal is better than no deal. I completely agree with him on that and so does the cabinet who have signed up to Chequers. Where this has got silly and ridiculous is to take this as meaning the absence of a deal means our economy will be a certain percentage smaller at some point in the future. It really doesn't.
I wish the company buenos dias.
Brexiters have had to trash every institution and the union itself. Unsurprising there is some fall out.
campaign and therefore unseemly. Imagine they'd tried these
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM2KE2Hb_Qw
"That's the reason why Corbynites (and politicians generally) complain of biased media - it's not that they make stuff up, but that they will take a theme and run with it, and simply ignore everything else."
That's true. Once a narrative Is set, the media take it as gospel and will ignore any other explanation. A typical example was the diesel-good, petrol-bad narrative which arose in the nineties. Despite science showing that diesel particulates were dangerous, the carbon dioxide must be reduced at all costs narrative held sway. And as always, the politicians went along with it, ignoring the science, because of the electoral appeal. There are many other examples.
You can blame the media, they like to set the agenda and not be deflected by inconvenient facts, but they are what they are. Science proceeds by challenging the prevailing view, the media proceeds by ignoring it when it's inconvenient. The politicians proceed by following the media's narrative. I think we deserve better, but that would be asking them to jeopardise their career.
Stick to the lawyering, I think.
To answer your question, reported concern about immigration is declining, as some pious Leavers pretend that their campaign had nothing to do with xenophobia and virtue signal that they like immigrants really and some Remainers have a genuine renewed appreciation of the value of immigration.
Meanwhile far right terrorism is on the rise, the government is committed to a hard Brexit as a consequence of the referendum campaign and Britain is retreating into a surly insularity.
Remain's campaign was almost entirely negative - by contrast that side-by-side ad you posted had a positive (if dishonest) claim - 'The NHS will be better if we Leave the EU'.
Take voters key concerns (we know the NHS is high on the list) and promise a better result - you and Mr Meeks only see the 'negative' side of the ad - perhaps voters paid attention to the 'positive' side, a better NHS?
Despite outspending LEAVE by nearly 50% REMAIN were out marketed - LEAVE had a product they believed in - REMAIN didn't.
Julie Bishop (64%) cf. Bill Shorten (36%).
Malcolm Turnbull (54%) cf. Bill Shorten (46%).
Bill Shorten (50.5%) cf. Scott Morrison (49.5%).
Bill Shorten (62%) cf. Peter Dutton (38%).
Morrison led 53 47 with men, Shorten 54 46 with women
https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7713-better-pm-bishop-shorten-morrison-august-23-2018-201808231320
Another case of Brexistentialism.
Shorten led with 18-49 year olds, Morrison with over 50s.
91% of LNP voters and 54% of Ind/Other voters (mainly One Nation) preferred Morrison over Shorten, 79% of ALP voters and 89% of Green voters preferred Shorten over Morrison.
By state Morrison was preferred over Shorten in Queensland and NSW while Shorten was preferred over Morrison in Victoria, SA and Tasmania and they were almost tied in WA.
https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7713-better-pm-bishop-shorten-morrison-august-23-2018-201808231320
Psychoanalysis and mind reading!
Wrong, of course, but there you go.....
Your volte face bears no scrutiny!
Brexit or no Brexit we would remain a middle ranking power rather than the superpower we were when we had the British Empire. Just some diehard Remainers would rather Brexit sees us decline so we are more likely to join a Federal EU
Positive beats negative - who knew?
Why didn't you say yes, damn it? I had a few pounds on at 61.
Worth pointing out Red Bull deny it.
I am disappointed Remain lost - but they lost because of a lifeless dull campaign, losing to a wittier more positive one - which ran circles round them with a big red bus.
But by all means, carry on blaming your opponents for your own failures - you won't learn much (or anything) that way, but its more comforting and reinforces your feeling of moral superiority.
I could see a second referendum happening. I cannot see Article 50 being revoked and the original question going through again.
Edited extra bit: to clarify, the difference would be the Leave option, namely the deal struck (or not, and knowingly not).
It was the whole side-by-side for goodness sake!
But because some have convinced themselves that 'xenophobic lies won the campaign' thats all they see - not the much bigger picture - and basis of the ad.
Do you think Leave's finance law breaches invalidates the result?
Cameron's 'Little Englander' comments were cheered by some pro-EU types here, but they backfired (as I, and others, suggested). Likewise Obama's 'back of the queue' nonsense. And the exaggerated nature of Project Wetpants meant that it was easily derided and the more credible and serious potential problems subsequently raised were taken less seriously. More time on EurATOM[sp] and less about overblown stories of everyone being thousands of pounds worse off would've worked far better.
Mind you, I'd still go back to Lisbon. My suspicion is many feared this was the only vote we'd ever get, following Brown reneging upon his manifesto promise for a referendum on Lisbon.
As a minor politician you have a simple choice: you can talk about the current media theme in a combative way, preferably unhelpful to your colleagues, in which case you'll get blanket coverage, or you can talk about something else and be ignored. I first experienced it within a month of being elected, when the Government hadn't quite decided about the Millennium Dome, but it was known that Mandelson was keen and Blair was inclined to back him. I said we should cancel the project as it was too expensive for what we'd get. I was besieged by media requests - at least 15 within 48 hours. Everyone wanted to give me the chance to express my views.
A few days later, the Government mildly fudged the decision - they'd go ahead but spend less on it. I said I thought it was a reasonable compromise. Interest in reporting that was zero.
Some years later, we had a big local controversy about an open-cast mine in my area. The Guardian had half a page on the Government's "impending betrayal" by allowing it to go ahead. I persuaded the Minister to veto it. I rang the Guardian's environment editor who had written the piece to give him the good news. He wasn't interested at all, and said, "Frankly, if they're not betraying people after all that's not news."
Conservative MPs will tell similar stories. But as Enoch Powell observed, "Politicians who complain about the media are like seamen who complain about the sea." You simply have to work with them. But we shouldn't nourish the illusion that they're a reliable, balanced source.
So despite being outspent by 2:1, Leave won - the power of advertising, eh?
When my daughter was in her teenage rebel phase, she used the phrase "Get over it." every time she was reprimanded. To be wedged firmly still in the 'denial' phase s worrying, even if you are in good company.
I expected Remain to win. At midnight on referendum day, I assumed they had done (my betting credentials are less acute than yours), and I shook hands with a Remainer friend. I was disappointed but that's democracy.
It may be Armageddon but it's never the end of the world.
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1032463005135585280
It strikes me as surprising that more people who voted to Remain don't pause for thought on what people's lives must be like to make them vote in a way that they find so distasteful, rather than dismiss them as bad people.
Did you know Force India are now on 0 points?
Edited extra bit: Mr. M, I recall that address well. Sheer idiocy from his underlings if that were the case.
It was clear that Leave would win when, on the Daily Politics on 20th June 2016 Nick Herbert had no answer to Kate Hoey when challenged about immigration were we to stay in the EU.
That is wot won it.
Buses be damned.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1032906976135729153
Hulkenburg also with a new engine BTW, he will go to the back as well.