When you look at the story there's nothing new. This is just a repeat of the de-dramatisation of the backstop that Barnier has been pursuing for weeks.
Nothing of the sort.
The EU wanted NI to be subject to the CU and SM rules. You can't 'de-dramatise' that - either NI is part of the UK or it is not. The DUP will never vote for a system where NI follows different rules.
So either May will concede that NI will be subject to the EU regulations, in which case it will get voted down, OR the EU concede that the ERG were right all along and that NI can be subject to UK regulations, in which case (as I have been saying for some time) the EU are preparing to ditch Chequers and push the UK towards CETA.
If the EU are now agreeing that a technological solution IS possible, then that is not a boost for May, it is a huge boost for the ERG.
You do talk some rubbish
If the EU concede to TM on this it will be seen as a big win for her.
As a matter of interest why do you care. It is not as if you have any stake in our Country
Not even sure what argument you are making. Do you think that the EU are agreeing that the NI border can be solved by technology? Because if so, you owe me, the ERG and all the 'headbangers' a bit of an apology....
Off topic but for those betting on the US elections, a few things to bear in mind.
(1) On the generic Congressional vote, a few people here commented on Quinnipac having a 14pc Democratic lead but keep in mind the spread on their lead has been vast in the polls. The range goes from +3 (Economist) to this +14% in the latest polls. So Quinnipac is not typical. Montana and West Virginia is play. But these
(3) The recent individual seat polls on the RCP toss-up seats in the House are not pointing to anything like a Blue Wave. CA-48, which should be a fairly safe Dem gain, is neck and neck. The GOP has a +8 lead in CA50, +6 in WI-1, +5 in ME2, +4 in VA-7, +16 in IA3, +8 in TX23, +8% in WV3, all counted as toss-ups. The Dems are ahead in some GOP seats but, even there, their leads tend to be slender (+1 in NC2, KS2, +2 in NY22, +2 in PA-7 which is counted as "Lean Dem"). That may change but, if you were a Democrat looking at some of those numbers, and with 2 months to go, you might be worried.
I agree 100% with you re the Senate. It would be a fantastic result for the Dems if they were to stand still, and would still probably be a good result if they were only to lose one or two senate seats given (a) what they hold at this point, and (b) what's up for election.
North Dakota, Montana and West Virginia were all extremely safe Republican states at the General, and it really shouldn't be a surprise if some of them were to flip back to the Republicans.
The House is a harder call. I find the 538 analysis persuasive, which is that the Dems currently look the favourites. (And I'm also sceptical, post 2016, of the accuracy of low level polling. Getting the national picture right is probably the most important thing.)
With all that said, I think that the last thing Trump needs is for the Republicans to hold on to the House and the Senate. I think that would inevitably end in the repeal of Obamacare. And that would be a disaster for Trump and the Republicans. Like Clinton in '94, losing the House would be a blessing for the President.
Indeed, Carter held the House and Senate in 1978 despite the Democrats losing 15 seats to the GOP and we all know what happened to him in 1980
Off topic but for those betting on the US elections, a few things to bear in mind.
(1) On the generic Congressional vote, a few people here commented on Quinnipac having a 14pc Democratic lead but keep in mind the spread on their lead has been vast in the polls. The range goes from +3 (Economist) to this +14% in the latest polls. So Quinnipac is not typical. Montana and West Virginia is play. But these
(3) The recent individual seat polls on the RCP toss-up seats in the House are not pointing to anything like a Blue Wave. CA-48, which should be a fairly safe Dem gain, is neck and neck. The GOP has a +8 lead in CA50, +6 in WI-1, +5 in ME2, +4 in VA-7, +16 in IA3, +8 in TX23, +8% in WV3, all counted as toss-ups. The Dems are ahead in some GOP seats but, even there, their leads tend to be slender (+1 in NC2, KS2, +2 in NY22, +2 in PA-7 which is counted as "Lean Dem"). That may change but, if you were a Democrat looking at some of those numbers, and with 2 months to go, you might be worried.
I agree 100% with you re the Senate. It would be a fantastic result for the Dems if they were to stand still, and would still probably be a good result if they were only to lose one or two senate seats given (a) what they hold at this point, and (b) what's up for election.
North Dakota, Montana and West Virginia were all extremely safe Republican states at the General, and it really shouldn't be a surprise if some of them were to flip back to the Republicans.
The House is a harder call. I find the 538 analysis persuasive, which is that the Dems currently look the favourites. (And I'm also sceptical, post 2016, of the accuracy of low level polling. Getting the national picture right is probably the most important thing.)
With all that said, I think that the last thing Trump needs is for the Republicans to hold on to the House and the Senate. I think that would inevitably end in the repeal of Obamacare. And that would be a disaster for Trump and the Republicans. Like Clinton in '94, losing the House would be a blessing for the President.
Indeed, Carter held the House and Senate in 1978 despite the Democrats losing 15 seats to the GOP and we all know what happened to him in 1980
I’m not convinced losing the House would do Trump much good.
Off topic but for those betting on the US elections, a few things to bear in mind.
(1) On the generic Congressional vote, a few people here commented on Quinnipac having a 14pc Democratic lead but keep in mind the spread on their lead has been vast in the polls. The range goes from +3 (Economist) to this +14% in the latest polls. So Quinnipac is not typical. Montana and West Virginia is play. But these
(3) The recent individual seat polls on the RCP toss-up seats in the House are not pointing to anything like a Blue Wave. CA-48, which should be a fairly safe Dem gain, is neck and neck. The GOP has a +8 lead in CA50, +6 in WI-1, +5 in ME2, +4 in VA-7, +16 in IA3, +8 in TX23, +8% in WV3, all counted as toss-ups. The Dems are ahead in some GOP seats but, even there, their leads tend to be slender (+1 in NC2, KS2, +2 in NY22, +2 in PA-7 which is counted as "Lean Dem"). That may change but, if you were a Democrat looking at some of those numbers, and with 2 months to go, you might be worried.
I agree 100% with you re the Senate. It would be a fantastic result for the Dems if they were to stand still, and would still probably be a good result if they were only to lose one or two senate seats given (a) what they hold at this point, and (b) what's up for election.
North Dakota, Montana and West Virginia were all extremely safe Republican states at the General, and it really shouldn't be a surprise if some of them were to flip back to the Republicans.
The House is a harder call. I find the 538 analysis persuasive, which is that the Dems currently look the favourites. (And I'm also sceptical, post 2016, of the accuracy of low level polling. Getting the national picture right is probably the most important thing.)
With all that said, I think that the last thing Trump needs is for the Republicans to hold on to the House and the Senate. I think that would inevitably end in the repeal of Obamacare. And that would be a disaster for Trump and the Republicans. Like Clinton in '94, losing the House would be a blessing for the President.
Indeed, Carter held the House and Senate in 1978 despite the Democrats losing 15 seats to the GOP and we all know what happened to him in 1980
I’m not convinced losing the House would do Trump much good.
It might force him a bit more to the centre as it did for Clinton in 1994 which would help his re election bid
So the earlier BBC report that there was no suggestion this was anything to do with the earlier attack is now looking rather over optimistic
Maybe there wasn't a "suggestion" at that time. Prematurely claiming that it's almost certainly another assassination attempt, before any facts have come out, isn't to anyone's benefit.
Off topic but for those betting on the US elections, a few things to bear in mind.
(1) On the generic Congressional vote, a few people here commented on Quinnipac having a 14pc Democratic lead but keep in mind the spread on their lead has been vast in the polls. The range goes from +3 (Economist) to this +14% in the latest polls. So Quinnipac is not typical. Montana and West Virginia is play. But these
(3) The recent individual seat polls on the RCP toss-up seats in the House are not pointing to anything like a Blue Wave. CA-48, which should be a fairly safe Dem gain, is neck and neck. The GOP has a +8 lead in CA50, +6 in WI-1, +5 in ME2, +4 in VA-7, +16 in IA3, +8 in TX23, +8% in WV3, all counted as toss-ups. The Dems are ahead in some GOP seats but, even there, their leads tend to be slender (+1 in NC2, KS2, +2 in NY22, +2 in PA-7 which is counted as "Lean Dem"). That may change but, if you were a Democrat looking at some of those numbers, and with 2 months to go, you might be worried.
I agree 100% with you re the Senate. It would be a fantastic result for the Dems if they were to stand still, and would still probably be a good result if they were only to lose one or two senate seats given (a) what they hold at this point, and (b) what's up for election.
North Dakota, Montana and West Virginia were all extremely safe Republican states at the General, and it really shouldn't be a surprise if some of them were to flip back to the Republicans.
The House is a harder call. I find the 538 analysis persuasive, which is that the Dems currently look the favourites. (And I'm also sceptical, post 2016, of the accuracy of low level polling. Getting the national picture right is probably the most important thing.)
With all that said, I think that the last thing Trump needs is for the Republicans to hold on to the House and the Senate. I think that would inevitably end in the repeal of Obamacare. And that would be a disaster for Trump and the Republicans. Like Clinton in '94, losing the House would be a blessing for the President.
Indeed, Carter held the House and Senate in 1978 despite the Democrats losing 15 seats to the GOP and we all know what happened to him in 1980
I’m not convinced losing the House would do Trump much good.
It might force him a bit more to the centre as it did for Clinton in 1994 which would help his re election bid
The real problem for Trump is that if the Dems gain either house, they gain control of all the investigative committees with their sub-poena powers.
So the earlier BBC report that there was no suggestion this was anything to do with the earlier attack is now looking rather over optimistic
Maybe there wasn't a "suggestion" at that time. Prematurely claiming that it's almost certainly another assassination attempt, before any facts have come out, isn't to anyone's benefit.
I am sure the fact one of those ill just happened to be Russian is mere coincidence
Off topic but for those betting on the US elections, a few things to bear in mind.
(1) On the generic Congressional vote, a few people here commented on Quinnipac having a 14pc Democratic lead but keep in mind the spread on their lead has been vast in the polls. The range goes from +3 (Economist) to this +14% in the latest polls. So Quinnipac is not typical. Montana and West Virginia is play. But these
(3) The recent individual seat polls on the RCP toss-up seats in the House are not pointing to anything like a Blue Wave. CA-48, which should be a fairly safe Dem gain, is neck and neck. The GOP has a +8 lead in CA50, +6 in WI-1, +5 in ME2, +4 in VA-7, +16 in IA3, +8 in TX23, +8% in WV3, all counted as toss-ups. The Dems are ahead in some GOP seats but, even there, their leads tend to be slender (+1 in NC2, KS2, +2 in NY22, +2 in PA-7 which is counted as "Lean Dem"). That may change but, if you were a Democrat looking at some of those numbers, and with 2 months to go, you might be worried.
I agree 100% with you re the Senate. It would be a fantastic result for the Dems if they were to stand still, and would still probably be a good result if they were only to lose one or two senate seats given (a) what they hold at this point, and (b) what's up for election.
North Dakota, Montana and West Virginia were all extremely safe Republican states at the General, and it really shouldn't be a surprise if some of them were to flip back to the Republicans.
The House is a harder call. I find the 538 analysis persuasive, which is that the Dems currently look the favourites. (And I'm also sceptical, post 2016, of the accuracy of low level polling. Getting the national picture right is probably the most important thing.)
With all that said, I think that the last thing Trump needs is for the Republicans to hold on to the House and the Senate. I think that would inevitably end in the repeal of Obamacare. And that would be a disaster for Trump and the Republicans. Like Clinton in '94, losing the House would be a blessing for the President.
Indeed, Carter held the House and Senate in 1978 despite the Democrats losing 15 seats to the GOP and we all know what happened to him in 1980
I’m not convinced losing the House would do Trump much good.
It might force him a bit more to the centre as it did for Clinton in 1994 which would help his re election bid
The real problem for Trump is that if the Dems gain either house, they gain control of all the investigative committees with their sub-poena powers.
They may then also overreach in terms of public opinion as the GOP did in 1998 when investigating Clinton
So the earlier BBC report that there was no suggestion this was anything to do with the earlier attack is now looking rather over optimistic
Maybe there wasn't a "suggestion" at that time. Prematurely claiming that it's almost certainly another assassination attempt, before any facts have come out, isn't to anyone's benefit.
I am sure the fact one of those ill just happened to be Russian is mere coincidence
Possibly - reading into the incident it appears the man was taken ill after visiting the loo and whilst his symptoms did present like poisoning they could also be due to drug taking.
So the earlier BBC report that there was no suggestion this was anything to do with the earlier attack is now looking rather over optimistic
Maybe there wasn't a "suggestion" at that time. Prematurely claiming that it's almost certainly another assassination attempt, before any facts have come out, isn't to anyone's benefit.
I am sure the fact one of those ill just happened to be Russian is mere coincidence
Possibly - reading into the incident it appears the man was taken ill after visiting the loo and whilst his symptoms did present like poisoning they could also be due to drug taking.
An excellent piece by Boris. The focus on the backstop is spot on - not only is it the excuse for not pursuing CETA but most people now accept that it is nothing to do with the border itself and that it is just an EU tactic. May’s deal will likely fall apart because the backstop will be judged unacceptable.
Never mind Boris, why is Victoria Beckham taking up most of the front page?
I agree 100% with you re the Senate. It would be a fantastic result for the Dems if they were to stand still, and would still probably be a good result if they were only to lose one or two senate seats given (a) what they hold at this point, and (b) what's up for election.
North Dakota, Montana and West Virginia were all extremely safe Republican states at the General, and it really shouldn't be a surprise if some of them were to flip back to the Republicans.
The House is a harder call. I find the 538 analysis persuasive, which is that the Dems currently look the favourites. (And I'm also sceptical, post 2016, of the accuracy of low level polling. Getting the national picture right is probably the most important thing.)
With all that said, I think that the last thing Trump needs is for the Republicans to hold on to the House and the Senate. I think that would inevitably end in the repeal of Obamacare. And that would be a disaster for Trump and the Republicans. Like Clinton in '94, losing the House would be a blessing for the President.
Indeed, Carter held the House and Senate in 1978 despite the Democrats losing 15 seats to the GOP and we all know what happened to him in 1980
I’m not convinced losing the House would do Trump much good.
It might force him a bit more to the centre as it did for Clinton in 1994 which would help his re election bid
The real problem for Trump is that if the Dems gain either house, they gain control of all the investigative committees with their sub-poena powers.
They may then also overreach in terms of public opinion as the GOP did in 1998 when investigating Clinton
The difference is that all the Republicans could pin on Clinton having done wrong was lie about having his c*ck sucked. Maybe Trump is 100% squeaky clean and has absolutely nothing to fear from having his business and personal affairs gone over with a fine tooth comb by a Congressional enquiry. Maybe.
Comments
It might just have been a dodgy prawn cocktail
That is what you meant, isn't it?
He careers from thought to thought without much evidence of reason.
Sad really.
We will find out soon enough