politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Now Corbyn and TMay are scrapping over whether the BBC or ITV hosts the Brexit debate
The BBC is reporting that both Corbyn and TMay have accepted invites to take part in a Brexit debate. Only problem is that the former wants it to be on ITV while the latter prefers the BBC.
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
That last one would be awesome. but if Private Eye is to be believed it'd have to be well past the watershed or else the broadcasters' beep machines would melt down.
(The Eye claims Dacre's daily editorial briefings were known at the Mail as "the Vagina Monologues" because of how much he used the c-word.)
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
Typical Corbyn isn't it...it is as if he has been a professional contrarian all his life.
If May had agreed to ITV, he would want BBC as they are the gold standard, watched by the most people, yadda yadda yadda.
I still haven't worked out why Team May thinks all of this is a good idea, it isn't as if she is a crack debater (more like cack debater) or overly confident in their ability e.g. Blair or Cameron.
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
Clegg and Farage?
Too soon?
How about pre-Referendum Boris vs post-Referendum Boris?
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
She has a cunning plan and I think she could win the meaningful vote.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and runs a terrible risk.
Maybe but she's facing Corbyn who gets rattled when interviewers interrupt him.
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons. Clarke vs Mogg grudge match Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
Clegg and Farage?
Too soon?
How about pre-Referendum Boris vs post-Referendum Boris?
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What voting system might Parliament agree for deciding by referendum? Realistic possibilities are five:
1. AV. 2. Leave - Yes or No, followed if "Yes" by round 2 asking Deal or No Deal. 3. Same as 2 but with conditional question on ballot. 4. Deal - Yes or No, followed if "No" by round 2 asking Remain or WTO. 5. Same as 4, but with conditional question on ballot.
You miss out the most obvious and the only one that had not already been asked.
Deal or No Deal. It honours the first referendum because not leaving is not an option and it asks the public to decide the form of Brexit which is what everyone claims to have been complaining about.
I fear that things have simply moved on from there.
My view is that it has to be AV on three options. Any less than that and you disenfranchise a lot of people and present legitimacy issues. However any attempt to two stage it, or to have a second round of some form actually doesn't make the options equivalent or provide a fair comparison.
However as I think Nick P stated way downthread, there needs to be a clear statement agreed with the EU about what remain means and what No Deal means. Are we remaining on same terms? What minimal or bare bones agreements would be kept in a no deal.
@Richard - I was only listing possibilities for how @Carlotta's proposal to seek the electorate's decision among all three options might be implemented.
@tpfkar - Completely agreed that the meaning of Remain and No Deal must be made at least as clear as the meaning of Deal. If I were a computer program I'd probably also agree that AV would be best because uniquely of the 5 it treats all options the same. In practice, though, Leave or Remain is a different kind of issue from what relationship to have with EU27 if it's Leave, a point which Remainers would be make if Deal were to win under AV.
I don't even want to imagine how politicians would play politics with the various options for a 3-option referendum or pair of referendums. The best they can come up with on the substantive issue is No Deal. The Westminster blob of government plus Parliament has failed the country. That's going to take a long time to sort out, if it ever is sorted out. Let's have a referendum on what the blob HAS come up with, which is No Deal. The alternative has got to be Remain, for reasons that include the fact that it's consistently showing as more popular in the polls than either Deal or No Deal.
Imagine if the electorate is allowed to choose Deal and they do. Do we want ANOTHER round of politicians sickmakingly saying "We don't agree with the people, but the people are our masters and so we must obey them", which we've put up with since 2016?
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
Precisely. Tbe Americans would call this a Hail Mary Pass.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
Right so Corbyn is more concerned with a gameshow than a debate on the future of the nation...
I can see the Mail & Sun headlines already!
May won the debate , they have already written it.
Shame no one watching actually will be able to vote.
Yes seems pointless grandstanding to me.
Both say we are honouring the 2016 referendum and we are leaving in March 2019.
End of debate.
If Corbyn had any sense, he would use it as a platform to announce he was backing a second referendum. Not because I want him to, but it seems like just a free hit.
He can caveat it with all sorts of similar impossible red lines to the EU deal if he wants, but the media will go wild and it won't have mattered what RoboMay has said up to then.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this mess.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
She has a cunning plan and I think she could win the meaningful vote.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this mess.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this her mess.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this mess.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this mess.
Richard she will always have your support. As would every Conservative leader.
Regarding the Cohen plea, recall that Trump only just submitted a sworn open book reply to Mueller questions which included this one:
What communication did you have with Michael D. Cohen, Felix Sater and others, including foreign nationals, about Russian real estate developments during the campaign?
What odds that he lied, under penalty of perjury ?
The choice of Sunday evening viewing is nearly as bad as May's deal.
What are you talking about. NFL Red Zone...best sport tv show going. Premier league et al. would be wise to follow suit.
On its own, an NFL game isn't actually the most exciting spectacle(*). Far too much downtime commercial breaks and nothing going on for plenty of time. Mesh 7 or 8 together though with Scott Hanson hosting though and it is bloody brilliant.
*Except for Rams - Chiefs
I don't think May is capable of flinging the needed Hail Mary though, but Corbyn won't pick six either.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this mess.
You know, we all think the jig is up, and and that she has nothing to lose.
But I'm not convinced she does. If she actually believes she's in with a chance, then this becomes foolhardy.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
Tory members like Corbyn even less than they like her and they put pressure on MPs, so there's a benefit to making it look like the dispute is between her and Corbyn, rather than between her and half the parliamentary Conservative party.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
An evening with Philip. Her dignity.
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
There may not be a strong likelihood of much upside, but there's a small likelihood of an enormous upside - saving the country from a No Deal disaster or another damaging referendum, rescuing her reputation and legacy, and exposing Corbyn for the charlatan he is. At the very least she is going to get recognition for trying her hardest to sort out this mess.
Richard she will always have your support. As would every Conservative leader.
Shame you do not have a vote.
I'm not sure that saying 'she hasn't much to lose' is an expression of support, but as a matter of simple fact it is not the case that every Conservative leader has had my support in the past, the current leader has my support only in a very limited sense, and it is certainly the case that several of the front-runners for her successor would not have my support in the future,
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
Regarding the Cohen plea, recall that Trump only just submitted a sworn open book reply to Mueller questions which included this one:
What communication did you have with Michael D. Cohen, Felix Sater and others, including foreign nationals, about Russian real estate developments during the campaign?
What odds that he lied, under penalty of perjury ?
His replies will have been written by lawyers (and they will have been checked 100 times) who will have couched every response in ways that make them hard to be direct lies.
There will be lots of "I do not recall" and "to the best of my knowledge".
Much, much more possible is that Trump Jr will have lied under oath. And I think would be a big issue for the Trump Presidency. There's no way that the President can allow his son to plead guilty and go to jail, even for a few days. There's no way that he can end up in court. There's no way he can be pardoned. That's why the Trump administration has been getting increasingly frenzied and have been retweeting the image of Rosenstein, Clinton and Obama behind bars and suggesting they should be jailed for treason. (Which is pretty astonishing, when you think of it.)
The assumption in the Trump camp had been - pre-Manafort - that trials would be seen to be politically motivated and a witchhunt, and therefore that there would always be at least one juror who would choose to ignore the evidence. That assumption has now changed.
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
Tory members like Corbyn even less than they like her and they put pressure on MPs, so there's a benefit to making it look like the dispute is between her and Corbyn, rather than between her and half the parliamentary Conservative party.
What does Theresa hope to achieve with this? Apart from supporters of her deal - who you could surely fit in a telephone box - everyone will be willing her to fail. I can't see here changing any minds, even if she has a blinder, and she runs a terrible risk.
What has she got to lose?
You have to assume she wants a deal of some kind. Saying the chances of that ever happening are so low there's nothing to wreck doesn't seem like a plan to me.
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
A woman whose ex-husband was convicted of rape and possessing child abuse images had to go to court to prevent him gaining access to her children, the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire programme has learned.
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
Corbyn prefers ITV , could May accept that ?
If not why ?
Corbyn prefers a format where he's not actually talking to Mrs May.
Edit to add: I think I'm actually completely wrong here...
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
Corbyn prefers ITV , could May accept that ?
If not why ?
Why does Corbyn call the shots?
He is concerned by BBC independent panel quering him on his brexit policy
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
Corbyn prefers ITV , could May accept that ?
If not why ?
Why does Corbyn call the shots?
He is concerned by BBC independent panel quering him on his brexit policy
Why? Surely he's got the ultimate hospital pass - "I'm sorry, I wasn't aware we had a Brexit policy."
Just arrived in to hear Sky reporting TM and the BBC have agreed the debate with an independent panel cross examining the leaders and for them to say Corbyn is concened he doesn't know the detail and wants it on ITV
That is labour's policy right there.
Theresa May proposed a head to head debate with Jeremy and is now trying to wiggle out of it.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
I do not understand your point and there is no need to shout
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
He doesn't, necessarily. But it's about the optics.
May, apparently, wants a head to head debate. ITV are offering it and May's running scared.
May wanted to "sell the deal to the people". ITV are offering an audience of real people, and May's running scared.
Labour are going to say (with some justification) that she wants to go with the Brexit-horny BBC because she knows they'll soft-pedal her, and she's a coward, avoiding a head-to-head in front of real people.
And we know May *is* a coward, so I think the charge will stick.
So BBC1 would show the Brexit debate in place of the Tiger documentary: a female who must protect her cubs while battling rivals who want to steal her lands. There's got to be a joke in there somewhere
Comments
Give me a break.
As Oscar Wilde said, the problem with socialism is that it takes up far too many of your evenings.
Hoey vs Lammy - the ultimate Labour debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons.
Foster vs Mary Lou McDonnell - Good one for NI
Boris vs Soubry - the ultimate Tory debate as to why the deal is terrible for completely opposing reasons.
Clarke vs Mogg grudge match
Flint vs Grieve - Labour vs Tory debate with a few twists
Cable vs Batten - Minor UK wide party debate
Geordie Grieg vs Dacre - New Mail vs Old Mail.
Barnier vs Boris - "Non", "Non", "Non".
(The Eye claims Dacre's daily editorial briefings were known at the Mail as "the Vagina Monologues" because of how much he used the c-word.)
Too soon?
If May had agreed to ITV, he would want BBC as they are the gold standard, watched by the most people, yadda yadda yadda.
I still haven't worked out why Team May thinks all of this is a good idea, it isn't as if she is a crack debater (more like cack debater) or overly confident in their ability e.g. Blair or Cameron.
@tpfkar - Completely agreed that the meaning of Remain and No Deal must be made at least as clear as the meaning of Deal. If I were a computer program I'd probably also agree that AV would be best because uniquely of the 5 it treats all options the same. In practice, though, Leave or Remain is a different kind of issue from what relationship to have with EU27 if it's Leave, a point which Remainers would be make if Deal were to win under AV.
I don't even want to imagine how politicians would play politics with the various options for a 3-option referendum or pair of referendums. The best they can come up with on the substantive issue is No Deal. The Westminster blob of government plus Parliament has failed the country. That's going to take a long time to sort out, if it ever is sorted out. Let's have a referendum on what the blob HAS come up with, which is No Deal. The alternative has got to be Remain, for reasons that include the fact that it's consistently showing as more popular in the polls than either Deal or No Deal.
Imagine if the electorate is allowed to choose Deal and they do. Do we want ANOTHER round of politicians sickmakingly saying "We don't agree with the people, but the people are our masters and so we must obey them", which we've put up with since 2016?
Not much in the scheme of things with the fate of the nation at stake, but it's not like there's a strong likelihood of much upside.
Both say we are honouring the 2016 referendum and we are leaving in March 2019.
End of debate.
He can caveat it with all sorts of similar impossible red lines to the EU deal if he wants, but the media will go wild and it won't have mattered what RoboMay has said up to then.
Not that I will be. Staff Christmas party for me.
As would every Conservative leader.
Shame you do not have a vote.
What communication did you have with Michael D. Cohen, Felix Sater and others, including foreign nationals, about Russian real estate developments during the campaign?
What odds that he lied, under penalty of perjury ?
*Except for Rams - Chiefs
I don't think May is capable of flinging the needed Hail Mary though, but Corbyn won't pick six either.
Ladbrokes odds, Trump departure year:
2018 - 34
2019 - 5
2020 - 11
2021 - 2 [this could be by losing the next presidential election, of course]
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1068168521669099520
🚨 100 Tory MPs have now indicated they will not vote for Theresa May's Brexit deal 🚨
Matthew Offord: "as the deal stands at the moment, I will vote against it"
They should put it on BBC 3 or ITV 4 for those that are interested.
Cohen will also do serious time and be disbarred but he can eventually move on.
But I'm not convinced she does. If she actually believes she's in with a chance, then this becomes foolhardy.
Conclusion: May knows it's a haily mary pass.
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1068175249689243651
So far.
(FPT)
Probably going to lose his military pension and be bankrupted even though he’s selling the family home.
I have a bit of sympathy but then I remember this.
https://youtu.be/gv6R76pHVCI
That is labour's policy right there.
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2018/11/29/how-donald-trump-appeals-to-men-secretly-insecure-about-their-manhood/
There will be lots of "I do not recall" and "to the best of my knowledge".
Much, much more possible is that Trump Jr will have lied under oath. And I think would be a big issue for the Trump Presidency. There's no way that the President can allow his son to plead guilty and go to jail, even for a few days. There's no way that he can end up in court. There's no way he can be pardoned. That's why the Trump administration has been getting increasingly frenzied and have been retweeting the image of Rosenstein, Clinton and Obama behind bars and suggesting they should be jailed for treason. (Which is pretty astonishing, when you think of it.)
The assumption in the Trump camp had been - pre-Manafort - that trials would be seen to be politically motivated and a witchhunt, and therefore that there would always be at least one juror who would choose to ignore the evidence. That assumption has now changed.
Interesting times.
The Republican Party establishment hate Trump. They see him as an electoral liability, a tarnisher of the brand, and frankly dangerous for America.
Trump will not stand down willingly. I'm not even sure he'd acknowledge losing the 2020 Presidential election.
That is not a head-to-head debate, that's a job interview for the people's commissar for tractor statistics.
If May is now scared of debating yer man Jez head on, then why in the name of ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY did she challenge him to one?
She has agreed a one on one on BBC - it is upto Corbyn to accept
Makes u think.
Listen to this then recant.
https://youtu.be/l2zk56DDjGc
If not why ?
Mueller's not that amateurish.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46387043
Edit to add: I think I'm actually completely wrong here...
May, apparently, wants a head to head debate. ITV are offering it and May's running scared.
May wanted to "sell the deal to the people". ITV are offering an audience of real people, and May's running scared.
Labour are going to say (with some justification) that she wants to go with the Brexit-horny BBC because she knows they'll soft-pedal her, and she's a coward, avoiding a head-to-head in front of real people.
And we know May *is* a coward, so I think the charge will stick.