https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
Unlike American Presidents, she isn't able to go on TV to do an 'address to the nation'. I don't know whether she even has that right, or not, but it would be a precedent she couldn't set (outside wartime). If she does a lunchtime press conference it will be watched only by journalists and PB'ers and then filtered through the media and miss most ordinary people. No-one watches PPBs any more; indeed I haven't seen one myself since 2017. Offering a debate with Corbyn is the only way she gets herself an unedited showing on evening weekend TV.
So she has something to announce during the debate, and the audience isn't really the public, but MPs, and specifically her own MPs (edit/ or perhaps she really does think Labour's are less idiotic than hers). It will be something sufficiently dramatic to influence their vote, and need to be said publicly so they have nowhere to hide. Which can only be to spell out what the government will do, in the event that her deal is voted down, and it will be something her MPs won't like.
The debate format is her choice. She could easily do a town hall, which is a more appropriate format for a proposition, unlike an election where the politicians are the product. Also bear in mind the MPs see Corbyn and May debate this stuff on a weekly basis. None of that has changed their minds.
There is no way that a town hall debate would get transmitted live on Sunday evening BBC or ITV.
I am not ignoring it. I am simply pointing out that options remain available. No Deal is what happens of we do nothing - my view is that the Commons will not allow the government to do nothing especially as the exacting details of just how fucked we are get unboxed in front of them.
As May is insisting that no further options bar her deal are possible, then her reaction to being heavily defeated will be instructive. Either she says "fine, no deal" at which point she is removed, or says "ok, let's do something else" at which point she is removed. The Commons can and will instruct the government, and if the government refuses the sovereign will of parliament it too can be removed.
You said that any other option apart from Remain or EFTA was fantasy. This is not the case.
If May decides that No Deal is the only option having seen all other options either voted down or being unacceptable to her then the only way to change that is to get rid of her. Parliament cannot force her to do something she does not want to do in the way you suggest.
For May to go there are only two options.
The first is that she is got rid of by her own party. The only people likely to do that are the ERG who would certainly not be averse to No Deal. So getting rid of May is unlikely to make No Deal any less likely.
The second is she loses a VONC in the House. Given that once her deal is gone there is very little chance of either her own party or the DUP wanting an election it seems extremely unlikely there are the numbers for that.
And as long as she stays in position (even if not in power) then a No Deal remains very likely.
Most of her rebels ostensibly want new deal not no deal and even some no dealers could probably live with a harder new deal.
I don't think they'd get it but on the basis that's whatctheyd try for.
She's entirely right. Something If it come up to avoid no deal but that's not certain and a lot of people are falsely saying they won't risk no deal.
May actually won't risk no deal. Indeed, she is criticised because she was just bluffing when she said no deal was better than a bad deal.
Of course. Could hardly say any deal is better than a no deal?????
Well you could but it looks bad. I wasn't criticising her on that point. Just noting that she, unlike many others, really is taking action to ensure no deal does not happen. Most of those who insist they will not are just making wishes that it wont.
May is now fully in Wonderland, a delightful land of delusion where the impossible becomes possible. Not only is she ignoring all political maths and sanity by insisting she will win the vote, she's doubling down with THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE which she has opted to shriek over and over on national TV during her "debate".
At which point she gets defeated massively. Having wasted 2 weeks the UK doesn't have, and having demeaned her office begging for miracles. Having at that point ruled out every possible option other than her deal as written what does she do then? Say "no deal it is" and "the policy of her Majesty's government is to spend the next 3 months saying "you voted for this, you got this" and eating popcorn as the UK slides towards the cliff edge that the government knows will smash us?
Ok, she's gambling holding a pair of 4s knowing she either bluffs a win or is gone. So when she loses, she'll be gone. You can't be PM, stake everything on a win, beg for it and then survive a defeat especially a heavy one. And unless the Tories come up with a party unity candidate PDQ it's going to be a fresh election or a very minority Corbyn government.
She hasn't wasted two weeks; more like two years!
Yeah, because *you* could have done so much better ...
Too many people pontificate about where shes gone wrong, and how they, or their favourite person, could have done better. Because their vision of Brexit (or not) is brilliant, and just scrunching up your eyes, crossing your fingers and wishing really hard will make it happen.
May has had to deal with the realities, which are made much more complex by people being unrealistic and doing the above. Yet she's put the work in and got a deal - which is more can be said for the likes of Boris and Davis.
It seems as though all May had to do was consult pb.com.
The site is rife with people of very different political persuasions arguing that they, or Corby, or Moggsy, could have got a better deal in double-quick time.
Or people arguing if only there were a general election or a people's vote, the result would magically be in accord with their own personal wishes and all problems would be fixed. In fact, all the polling evidence we have suggests that a general election or referendum would yield rather similar, inconclusive results to last time.
Some of the Labour criticism of May has begun to strike me as misogynistic (shades of the Labour treatment of Leanne Wood or Nicola Sturgeon).
(And I am no fan of May and I didn't vote for her).
Just as well Mrs May didn't call a snap election when she saw the initial figures....
It might concentrate the desperate minds of the "only alternative to a people's vote is another general election" brigade. Labour are still struggling behind The Tories after that General Election last year. There is something about Corbyn which fails to swing voters behind his party.
He did pretty well at it last time..
Can't speak for others but I'd still be fairly confident and up for an election.
Corbyn still can't maintain any sort of lead over The Tories. The government may be perceived to be divided, but then look at the numbers of MPs who have been sacked or removed from the front bench by Corbyn since he became leader. Labour is hardly united over Brexit.
Past Labour Leaders managed to build up consistent leads over unpopular Tory governments, yet Corbyn has yet to hit a double digit lead over a 'divided' ministry.
Voters are clearly getting fed up with Labour points scoring to try and get a general election rather than either focusing on getting a decent Brexit Deal and backing the government or committing to a second EU referendum like the LDs.
Hence the Tories and LDs are up at Labour's expense. Coupled with the Delta poll last night showing May's Deal clearly preferred to Remain or No Deal head to head it is encouraging for May
Let us see what other polls show, I mean a 1% change is roundings or just sample variation.
We should be due an Opinium poll this weekend, we might see some other polls as well.
Of course but I think the trend is moving against Labour and towards the Deal
I am not ignoring it. I am simply pointing out that options remain available. No Deal is what happens of we do nothing - my view is that the Commons will not allow the government to do nothing especially as the exacting details of just how fucked we are get unboxed in front of them.
As May is insisting that no further options bar her deal are possible, then her reaction to being heavily defeated will be instructive. Either she says "fine, no deal" at which point she is removed, or says "ok, let's do something else" at which point she is removed. The Commons can and will instruct the government, and if the government refuses the sovereign will of parliament it too can be removed.
You said that any other option apart from Remain or EFTA was fantasy. This is not the case.
If May decides that No Deal is the only option having seen all other options either voted down or being unacceptable to her then the only way to change that is to get rid of her. Parliament cannot force her to do something she does not want to do in the way you suggest.
For May to go there are only two options.
The first is that she is got rid of by her own party. The only people likely to do that are the ERG who would certainly not be averse to No Deal. So getting rid of May is unlikely to make No Deal any less likely.
The second is she loses a VONC in the House. Given that once her deal is gone there is very little chance of either her own party or the DUP wanting an election it seems extremely unlikely there are the numbers for that.
And as long as she stays in position (even if not in power) then a No Deal remains very likely.
The single most striking feature of us being where we are is that Remainers have allowed the possibility of No Deal to survive. Without Gina Miller's intervention in the courts, May got the Cabinet approval to her Deal and flew over to Brussels with her signing pen two weeks ago.
No Deal is like the cockroach in the desert, the only thing surviving a nuclear blast. Out it crawls, going about its business. Remainers seem to have been blind to its indestructability...and they have nothing left with which to kill it. Apart from accepting May's deal.
Bear in mind Edinburgh will be the 7th T26 (assuming the MoD sign on the dotted for the second batch which is far from a certainty) so The Fireplace Salesman is announcing the name of a ship which hasn't been ordered and if it were will be commissioned in the mid 2030s! That is how fucking pathetic and desperate he is.
Magic flaking off Magic Grandpa. Less Dynamo, more Tommy Cooper......
Still a 1.5% swing from Labour to the Tories since the general election, enough for a May majority
The Tories are lucky that when people think Tory they are looking at the PM, rather than some of the unsavoury idiots behind her. If she is deposed I would expect to see these figures shift , and not in a way that her opponents would like.
Agreed, no alternative leader polls any better than May and most poll worse
Just as well Mrs May didn't call a snap election when she saw the initial figures....
It might concentrate the desperate minds of the "only alternative to a people's vote is another general election" brigade. Labour are still struggling behind The Tories after that General Election last year. There is something about Corbyn which fails to swing voters behind his party.
He did pretty well at it last time..
Can't speak for others but I'd still be fairly confident and up for an election.
Corbyn still can't maintain any sort of lead over The Tories. The government may be perceived to be divided, but then look at the numbers of MPs who have been sacked or removed from the front bench by Corbyn since he became leader. Labour is hardly united over Brexit.
Past Labour Leaders managed to build up consistent leads over unpopular Tory governments, yet Corbyn has yet to hit a double digit lead over a 'divided' ministry.
He does his own thing. Start from behind and claw it back during a campaign. Curious stuff.
Voters are clearly getting fed up with Labour points scoring to try and get a general election rather than either focusing on getting a decent Brexit Deal and backing the government or committing to a second EU referendum like the LDs.
Hence the Tories and LDs are up at Labour's expense. Coupled with the Delta poll last night showing May's Deal clearly preferred to Remain or No Deal head to head it is encouraging for May
Or, the vice is starting to squeeze both Labour strong remainers and strong leavers away, as it stays perched on the fence.
Corbyn has tried to play both sides for too long and in reality his permanent Customs Union but not Single Market policy is little different to May's Customs Union backstop policy
May is now fully in Wonderland, a delightful land of delusion where the impossible becomes possible. Not only is she ignoring all political maths and sanity by insisting she will win the vote, she's doubling down with THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE which she has opted to shriek over and over on national TV during her "debate".
At which point she gets defeated massively. Having wasted 2 weeks the UK doesn't have, and having demeaned her office begging for miracles. Having at that point ruled out every possible option other than her deal as written what does she do then? Say "no deal it is" and "the policy of her Majesty's government is to spend the next 3 months saying "you voted for this, you got this" and eating popcorn as the UK slides towards the cliff edge that the government knows will smash us?
Ok, she's gambling holding a pair of 4s knowing she either bluffs a win or is gone. So when she loses, she'll be gone. You can't be PM, stake everything on a win, beg for it and then survive a defeat especially a heavy one. And unless the Tories come up with a party unity candidate PDQ it's going to be a fresh election or a very minority Corbyn government.
She hasn't wasted two weeks; more like two years!
Yeah, because *you* could have done so much better ...
Too many people pontificate about where shes gone wrong, and how they, or their favourite person, could have done better. Because their vision of Brexit (or not) is brilliant, and just scrunching up your eyes, crossing your fingers and wishing really hard will make it happen.
May has had to deal with the realities, which are made much more complex by people being unrealistic and doing the above. Yet she's put the work in and got a deal - which is more can be said for the likes of Boris and Davis.
It seems as though all May had to do was consult pb.com.
Some of the Labour criticism of May has begun to strike me as misogynistic (shades of the Labour treatment of Leanne Wood or Nicola Sturgeon).
(And I am no fan of May and I didn't vote for her).
Good post. I don't think May has done very well, but I don't think there was any magic bullet for this issue. Negotiations are always fraught, complex ones, more so. She's a bit tin-eared, can't pick personnel or carry her party with her, but her only tactical mistake (as opposed to failings in her personality) was GE17. I think her in error to have called it - it damaged her reputation - doubly so because the campaign, which was built around her, was so fucking awful.
Voters are clearly getting fed up with Labour points scoring to try and get a general election rather than either focusing on getting a decent Brexit Deal and backing the government or committing to a second EU referendum like the LDs.
Hence the Tories and LDs are up at Labour's expense. Coupled with the Delta poll last night showing May's Deal clearly preferred to Remain or No Deal head to head it is encouraging for May
I don't think that is clear at all. It could easily be that the Tories represent both sides of the current debate.
If you are opposed to the deal then there are Tories like Davis, Johnson and that second-rater from the 18th century. If you back the deal then there is May and her loyalists. Labour doesn't get a look in.
The debate might change that, though its effect on public opinion will be quickly superseded by the vote itself.
Just as well Mrs May didn't call a snap election when she saw the initial figures....
It might concentrate the desperate minds of the "only alternative to a people's vote is another general election" brigade. Labour are still struggling behind The Tories after that General Election last year. There is something about Corbyn which fails to swing voters behind his party.
He did pretty well at it last time..
Can't speak for others but I'd still be fairly confident and up for an election.
Corbyn still can't maintain any sort of lead over The Tories. The government may be perceived to be divided, but then look at the numbers of MPs who have been sacked or removed from the front bench by Corbyn since he became leader. Labour is hardly united over Brexit.
Past Labour Leaders managed to build up consistent leads over unpopular Tory governments, yet Corbyn has yet to hit a double digit lead over a 'divided' ministry.
He does his own thing. Start from behind and claw it back during a campaign. Curious stuff.
But, the polling now is highly relevant to what happens.
Corbyn (and Labour) would be in a much stronger & convincing position to call for an election, if there was a ten or fifteen per cent polling lead.
As it is, it just looks like dumb political posturing while the country faces a crisis.
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
Re rottenborough’s post earlier: the demographic that really swung it for Corbyn last time, was not 18-24 year olds, but 25-40. While this group don’t like Brexit, they weren’t just voting for Corbyn purely for that reason.
I missed the drama over YouGov’s poll last night but it looks to me like the actual VI are close to figures we’ve seen from them for months now. Even the last YouGov before this one IIRC was quite different to others a week ago, which either had Labour in the lead or tied. So we’ll see which polllster is right and which one is wrong in the long run. Would love to know what that YouGov model is saying atm from the last GE.
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
If the EU offer the months extension is TM more or less secure?
Realisitically the only thing it offers time for is a general election.
In theory, on a Deal or No Deal question with Labour led by a Communist clown and a dithering old fool, May would have every chance of winning such an election.
However, it's Theresa May we're talking about here.
So I would say, she's toast in that scenario.
Yes, or a #peoplesvote, which is the most likely consequence if the Commons rejects May's deal.
I think the Tory backbenchers are too chicken to vote it down though.
Please don’t insult our intelligence by spreading your campaigning hashtags on here, like you’ve been told to do.
Just use plain English.
(makes mental note to use #peoplesvote hashtag more often to wind up #pbtories)
I've previously kind of thought the #peoplesvote thing is bollox, but on that basis I'm warming to #peoplesvote and may start peppering my contributions with #peoplesvote.
May is now fully in Wonderland, a delightful land of delusion where the impossible becomes possible. Not only is she ignoring all political maths and sanity by insisting she will win the vote, she's doubling down with THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE which she has opted to shriek over and over on national TV during her "debate".
At which point she gets defeated massively. Having wasted 2 weeks the UK doesn't have, and having demeaned her office begging for miracles. Having at that point ruled out every possible option other than her deal as written what does she do then? Say "no deal it is" and "the policy of her Majesty's government is to spend the next 3 months saying "you voted for this, you got this" and eating popcorn as the UK slides towards the cliff edge that the government knows will smash us?
Ok, she's gambling holding a pair of 4s knowing she either bluffs a win or is gone. So when she loses, she'll be gone. You can't be PM, stake everything on a win, beg for it and then survive a defeat especially a heavy one. And unless the Tories come up with a party unity candidate PDQ it's going to be a fresh election or a very minority Corbyn government.
Pair of 4s loses against a full table of other options but wins most times heads up. Hence why trying to go heads up against Corbyn is a masterstroke.
As for hurtling towards the cliff edge, saying "you voted for this" that is what we need. If we are to get a good deal from Europe they need to think we are willing to head over the cliff and are worried we will take them with us so they jump out of the way.
Re rottenborough’s post earlier: the demographic that really swung it for Corbyn last time, was not 18-24 year olds, but 25-40. While this group don’t like Brexit, they weren’t just voting for Corbyn purely for that reason.
I missed the drama over YouGov’s poll last night but it looks to me like the actual VI are close to figures we’ve seen from them for months now. Even the last YouGov before this one IIRC was quite different to others a week ago, which either had Labour in the lead or tied. So we’ll see which polllster is right and which one is wrong in the long run. Would love to know what that YouGov model is saying atm from the last GE.
Like the poll tax was in Scotland, Brexit is a signifier for under 40s that the Conservatives are working against their interests. There’s a reason why large numbers of such voters voted Conservative in 2015, Remain in 2016 and Labour in 2017.
As in Scotland, the signifier effect will probably not diminish with time.
I am not ignoring it. I am simply pointing out that options remain available. No Deal is what happens of we do nothing - my view is that the Commons will not allow the government to do nothing especially as the exacting details of just how fucked we are get unboxed in front of them.
As May is insisting that no further options bar her deal are possible, then her reaction to being heavily defeated will be instructive. Either she says "fine, no deal" at which point she is removed, or says "ok, let's do something else" at which point she is removed. The Commons can and will instruct the government, and if the government refuses the sovereign will of parliament it too can be removed.
You said that any other option apart from Remain or EFTA was fantasy. This is not the case.
If May decides that No Deal is the only option having seen all other options either voted down or being unacceptable to her then the only way to change that is to get rid of her. Parliament cannot force her to do something she does not want to do in the way you suggest.
For May to go there are only two options.
The first is that she is got rid of by her own party. The only people likely to do that are the ERG who would certainly not be averse to No Deal. So getting rid of May is unlikely to make No Deal any less likely.
The second is she loses a VONC in the House. Given that once her deal is gone there is very little chance of either her own party or the DUP wanting an election it seems extremely unlikely there are the numbers for that.
And as long as she stays in position (even if not in power) then a No Deal remains very likely.
The single most striking feature of us being where we are is that Remainers have allowed the possibility of No Deal to survive. Without Gina Miller's intervention in the courts, May got the Cabinet approval to her Deal and flew over to Brussels with her signing pen two weeks ago.
No Deal is like the cockroach in the desert, the only thing surviving a nuclear blast. Out it crawls, going about its business. Remainers seem to have been blind to its indestructability...and they have nothing left with which to kill it. Apart from accepting May's deal.
A cockroach surviving a nuclear blast seems a low bar for success on your Brexit project. Do you think people will accept that?
Just as well Mrs May didn't call a snap election when she saw the initial figures....
It might concentrate the desperate minds of the "only alternative to a people's vote is another general election" brigade. Labour are still struggling behind The Tories after that General Election last year. There is something about Corbyn which fails to swing voters behind his party.
He did pretty well at it last time..
Can't speak for others but I'd still be fairly confident and up for an election.
Corbyn still can't maintain any sort of lead over The Tories. The government may be perceived to be divided, but then look at the numbers of MPs who have been sacked or removed from the front bench by Corbyn since he became leader. Labour is hardly united over Brexit.
Past Labour Leaders managed to build up consistent leads over unpopular Tory governments, yet Corbyn has yet to hit a double digit lead over a 'divided' ministry.
I don’t think voters care about whether a governments or parties are united or divided. The LDs were probably the most united party going into the last GE, it didn’t help them that much. I also get the impression that Brexit has become such a long, drawn out and complex process many have switched over from following it closely. It’s only really Westminster Village types who are studying every event and moment.
As for the past: in these times I don’t think we should use it as a predictor as to what will happen in the future. May and Corbyn certainly should have both been gone by now according to expectations from the past. May’s survival, especially considering how brutal the Tories have been before with their leaders continues to confound expectations. Corbyn should have never come close to 40% last year by past expectations.
So has PB come up with ideas as to how there were over 300 thousand more immigrants in the year to June 2018 yet the number of immigrants in work fell during that period ?
I’d assume it’s chain migration from the Indian subcontinent?
If the EU offer the months extension is TM more or less secure?
Realisitically the only thing it offers time for is a general election.
In theory, on a Deal or No Deal question with Labour led by a Communist clown and a dithering old fool, May would have every chance of winning such an election.
However, it's Theresa May we're talking about here.
So I would say, she's toast in that scenario.
Yes, or a #peoplesvote, which is the most likely consequence if the Commons rejects May's deal.
I think the Tory backbenchers are too chicken to vote it down though.
Please don’t insult our intelligence by spreading your campaigning hashtags on here, like you’ve been told to do.
Just use plain English.
(makes mental note to use #peoplesvote hashtag more often to wind up #pbtories)
I've previously kind of thought the #peoplesvote thing is bollox, but on that basis I'm warming to #peoplesvote and may start peppering my contributions with #peoplesvote.
#peoplesvote is certainly worthy of protracted and repeated discussion.
So has PB come up with ideas as to how there were over 300 thousand more immigrants in the year to June 2018 yet the number of immigrants in work fell during that period ?
More children and non working spouses.
Spouses should be working. We're not in the eighties any more.
The cultures of South Asia and Middle East where many of the non-EU migrants come from are not noted for their progressive feminist perspectives.
Why do we permit chain migration but make it hard for the likes of @Sandpit to bring their spouses here?
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Voters are clearly getting fed up with Labour points scoring to try and get a general election rather than either focusing on getting a decent Brexit Deal and backing the government or committing to a second EU referendum like the LDs.
Hence the Tories and LDs are up at Labour's expense. Coupled with the Delta poll last night showing May's Deal clearly preferred to Remain or No Deal head to head it is encouraging for May
I don't think that is clear at all. It could easily be that the Tories represent both sides of the current debate.
If you are opposed to the deal then there are Tories like Davis, Johnson and that second-rater from the 18th century. If you back the deal then there is May and her loyalists. Labour doesn't get a look in.
The debate might change that, though its effect on public opinion will be quickly superseded by the vote itself.
There are different sides represented on the Labour backbenchers just Corbyn is opposed to Remain, the Deal and No Deal
Tbf to Williamson (an unnatural position for me), an HMS Glasgow T26 is already under construction. Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
So has PB come up with ideas as to how there were over 300 thousand more immigrants in the year to June 2018 yet the number of immigrants in work fell during that period ?
More children and non working spouses.
Spouses should be working. We're not in the eighties any more.
The cultures of South Asia and Middle East where many of the non-EU migrants come from are not noted for their progressive feminist perspectives.
Why do we permit chain migration but make it hard for the likes of @Sandpit to bring their spouses here?
You have to know the system and how to work it to get your family. Some nations have a culture where seeking out the flaws, gaming the system and honesty is highly subjective and not prized.
You don’t get maximum PIP points by telling the truth. That’s why it seems so hard when what seem like deserving cases get very little but people suffering ailments that are subjectively unprovable manage to get the full awards.
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
I know you’re joking - but when people like Fallon come out against the deal I do begin to wonder if this is the plan all along...
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
In life as in football everything is made more complicated by the presence of the opposing team.
Corbyn has better people skills, and May's mental rigidity does not come over well in such situations, which is why she has so often funked out of debates in the past.
She may plan to humiliate him, but he may well politely pull the rug out from under her.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
In life as in football everything is made more complicated by the presence of the opposing team.
Corbyn has better people skills, and May's mental rigidity does not come over well in such situations, which is why she has so often funked out of debates in the past.
She may plan to humiliate him, but he may well politely pull the rug out from under her.
Why is it he seems to get irritable in pretty much any interview where he is challenged, then?
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
So has PB come up with ideas as to how there were over 300 thousand more immigrants in the year to June 2018 yet the number of immigrants in work fell during that period ?
More children and non working spouses.
Spouses should be working. We're not in the eighties any more.
The cultures of South Asia and Middle East where many of the non-EU migrants come from are not noted for their progressive feminist perspectives.
Why do we permit chain migration but make it hard for the likes of @Sandpit to bring their spouses here?
I was asking a similar question yesterday and no one seems to know the answer. Two thirds of non-EU immigration in the last year was from Asia.
My former colleague from Australia was an expert in his field (having a phd and excellent commercial experience), but when the company went bust he had a few weeks to leave the country.
Another friend married an Australian women, but she was only allowed to stay in the UK for a limited time each year and they had to live in Portugal the rest of the time.
Whereas chain migration from India and Pakistan seems very easy in comparison.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Farage et al would have been yammering on about it from day 1 of a Remain win. In fact he was priming it on day -47.
'Farage told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”
...In the event of a defeat Farage, who maintains Britain will vote to quit the EU, would exploit claims the referendum was unfair after the Government dubiously spent £9m on a leaflet to every home.'
After performing a masterly smoke-screen, the 100+ Tory MPs who said they would never vote for May's Deal all do so on the day. The DUP are bought off for another couple of billion "aye, but your Chancellor there has £15 billion sat looking for a home if we actually Brexit, so he does....". May's Deal passes. Labour are left with mouths opening and closing, but no sound coming out. We get on with the hard negotiations after May steps down in January and Prime Minister Javid tells the EU "If you don't negotiate our trade deal in good faith - I'll just walk away from your stinking "Treaty"....."
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
Given how useless Labour's whipping operation is I could easily envisage them being caught unawares and losing the vote narrowly if the rebellion against May is much (much) smaller than expected.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
McD is clearly on maneuvers now that he has raised the possibility of a #peoplesvote. Corbyn's Kronstadt moment awaits.
Tbf to Williamson (an unnatural position for me), an HMS Glasgow T26 is already under construction. Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
In life as in football everything is made more complicated by the presence of the opposing team.
Corbyn has better people skills, and May's mental rigidity does not come over well in such situations, which is why she has so often funked out of debates in the past.
She may plan to humiliate him, but he may well politely pull the rug out from under her.
My guess is that we'll come out of the debate thinking that was a waste of time. May and Corbyn are both tribal politicians when what's needed right now is a consensus.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
Watch the debate?
I'd rather stick red hot knitting needles into my eyeballs, tbh.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
Remain claimed that upon a leave vote there would be financial chaos unleashed and an emergency budget called. That was a lie.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
Watch the debate?
I'd rather stick red hot knitting needles into my eyeballs, tbh.
Good. Then we'll be spared any comments from you on it.....
Last night's 10% lead for the conservatives had error written all over it but the corrected poll with a 5% lead does give some pause for thought
As I have maintained TM has cut through, despite protestations to the contrary, and her message is simple to understand. The public are hearing TM confirm we are leaving the EU in March 19, we are taking control of our borders and money, we will do trade deals, and we will not have a second referendum. She continues that voters just want to move on and deal with domestic issues including the NHS and Schools
Contrast that to mps who want to frustrate a deal that was hard won and fight their own ultra positions. Add into the mix labour calling for a GE to frustrate the process and you can see why TM is winning the public vote and labour are looking self indulgent
The country always supports the underdog and when it sees groups of white pale and stale men as evident in the EU and ERG attacking a woman who clearly is well on top of her subject, misogyny plays a role in her support. Significant that she is attracking a lot of female support
It is an irony that some in her party want to depose her, when at present, she is an electoral asset and if they were successful they would hand the batton to labour
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
McD is clearly on maneuvers now that he has raised the possibility of a #peoplesvote. Corbyn's Kronstadt moment awaits.
I doubt Corbyn would be unduly fussed by his lifelong best friend and ideological twin becoming PM in his stead. But in the event of a leadership vacancy, he wouldn't get a coronation.
So has PB come up with ideas as to how there were over 300 thousand more immigrants in the year to June 2018 yet the number of immigrants in work fell during that period ?
More children and non working spouses.
Spouses should be working. We're not in the eighties any more.
The cultures of South Asia and Middle East where many of the non-EU migrants come from are not noted for their progressive feminist perspectives.
Why do we permit chain migration but make it hard for the likes of @Sandpit to bring their spouses here?
Just to prove how democratic they (and their repeated-vote-until-we-get-the-"right"-answer plan) are, the hatshaggers should switch to #democraticpeoplesvote
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
McD is clearly on maneuvers now that he has raised the possibility of a #peoplesvote. Corbyn's Kronstadt moment awaits.
I doubt Corbyn would be unduly fussed by his lifelong best friend and ideological twin becoming PM in his stead. But in the event of a leadership vacancy, he wouldn't get a coronation.
McDonnell doesn't want to be PM. He wants to be Chancellor pulling the strings. He has stated that the next leader of the Labour Party will be a woman - Thornberry, Rayner or Long-Bailey.
Tbf to Williamson (an unnatural position for me), an HMS Glasgow T26 is already under construction. Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
You could not make up how thick these Tories are.
You not having a go at me on such a lovely morning are you Malc ?
Last night's 10% lead for the conservatives had error written all over it but the corrected poll with a 5% lead does give some pause for thought
As I have maintained TM has cut through, despite protestations to the contrary, and her message is simple to understand. The public are hearing TM confirm we are leaving the EU in March 19, we are taking control of our borders and money, we will do trade deals, and we will not have a second referendum. She continues that voters just want to move on and deal with domestic issues including the NHS and Schools
Contrast that to mps who want to frustrate a deal that was hard won and fight their own ultra positions. Add into the mix labour calling for a GE to frustrate the process and you can see why TM is winning the public vote and labour are looking self indulgent
The country always supports the underdog and when it sees groups of white pale and stale men as evident in the EU and ERG attacking a woman who clearly is well on top of her subject, misogyny plays a role in her support. Significant that she is attracking a lot of female support
It is an irony that some in her party want to depose her, when at present, she is an electoral asset and if they were successful they would hand the batton to labour
McDonnell doesn't want to be PM. He wants to be Chancellor pulling the strings. He has stated that the next leader of the Labour Party will be a woman - Thornberry, Rayner or Long-Bailey.
Ms Thornberry does feel like a value bet to be the next leader. But there seems to be little enthusiasm from the Labour front bench to hasten a vacancy.
Voters are clearly getting fed up with Labour points scoring to try and get a general election rather than either focusing on getting a decent Brexit Deal and backing the government or committing to a second EU referendum like the LDs.
Hence the Tories and LDs are up at Labour's expense. Coupled with the Delta poll last night showing May's Deal clearly preferred to Remain or No Deal head to head it is encouraging for May
I don't think that is clear at all. It could easily be that the Tories represent both sides of the current debate.
If you are opposed to the deal then there are Tories like Davis, Johnson and that second-rater from the 18th century. If you back the deal then there is May and her loyalists. Labour doesn't get a look in.
The debate might change that, though its effect on public opinion will be quickly superseded by the vote itself.
There are different sides represented on the Labour backbenchers just Corbyn is opposed to Remain, the Deal and No Deal
Not really, they are virtually extinct. There is literally a handful of Brexit supporting Labour MPs. They are all aging and mostly facing deselection. In a party where 90% of the membership is now strongly Remain there is absolutely no chance of any openly Brexit supporting candidates being selected. Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer but he is not going to be around forever. In a few years the positions of the Lib Dems and Labour on the EU will be indistinguishable and the Labour leadership will be leading them.
Not really, they are virtually extinct. There is literally a handful of Brexit supporting Labour MPs. They are all aging and mostly facing deselection. In a party where 90% of the membership is now strongly Remain there is absolutely no chance of any openly Brexit supporting candidates being selected. Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer but he is not going to be around forever. In a few years the positions of the Lib Dems and Labour on the EU will be indistinguishable and the Labour leadership will be leading them.
Of the tiny handful of Brexiteer Labour MPs, they've all either lost the whip, been deselected, announced their retirement and/or any or all of the above.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
Watch the debate?
I'd rather stick red hot knitting needles into my eyeballs, tbh.
Good. Then we'll be spared any comments from you on it.....
You can write up "Total garbage and a tissue of lies" now and save yourself an hour of your life.
Tbf to Williamson (an unnatural position for me), an HMS Glasgow T26 is already under construction. Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
You could not make up how thick these Tories are.
You not having a go at me on such a lovely morning are you Malc ?
G you are an honourable exception to the norm, the biggest donkeys seem to get to Westminster as well.
Last night's 10% lead for the conservatives had error written all over it but the corrected poll with a 5% lead does give some pause for thought
As I have maintained TM has cut through, despite protestations to the contrary, and her message is simple to understand. The public are hearing TM confirm we are leaving the EU in March 19, we are taking control of our borders and money, we will do trade deals, and we will not have a second referendum. She continues that voters just want to move on and deal with domestic issues including the NHS and Schools
Contrast that to mps who want to frustrate a deal that was hard won and fight their own ultra positions. Add into the mix labour calling for a GE to frustrate the process and you can see why TM is winning the public vote and labour are looking self indulgent
The country always supports the underdog and when it sees groups of white pale and stale men as evident in the EU and ERG attacking a woman who clearly is well on top of her subject, misogyny plays a role in her support. Significant that she is attracking a lot of female support
It is an irony that some in her party want to depose her, when at present, she is an electoral asset and if they were successful they would hand the batton to labour
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Is there not a danger that we're heading towards a view that it doesn't matter if you get HIV, we can treat it with drugs? What if the drugs stop working?
McDonnell doesn't want to be PM. He wants to be Chancellor pulling the strings. He has stated that the next leader of the Labour Party will be a woman - Thornberry, Rayner or Long-Bailey.
Ms Thornberry does feel like a value bet to be the next leader. But there seems to be little enthusiasm from the Labour front bench to hasten a vacancy.
It will be agreed between Corbyn and McDonnell if Corbyn can be convinced by McDonnell that it would make the Party more electable to have a loyal, more voter friendly woman as leader.
I'd like to see some polling of Labour share with each of the above mentioned women as leader compared to Corbyn.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
In life as in football everything is made more complicated by the presence of the opposing team.
Corbyn has better people skills, and May's mental rigidity does not come over well in such situations, which is why she has so often funked out of debates in the past.
She may plan to humiliate him, but he may well politely pull the rug out from under her.
'Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face'.
This would also be an excellent title for Mrs May's political memoirs.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
McD is clearly on maneuvers now that he has raised the possibility of a #peoplesvote. Corbyn's Kronstadt moment awaits.
I don’t think he’s on the manoveures so much as he wants Labour to win and will strategically move to certain positions in order to achieve that. Stephen Bush wrote a very good article in The Times recently on how McDonnelll operates.
Tbf to Williamson (an unnatural position for me), an HMS Glasgow T26 is already under construction. Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
You could not make up how thick these Tories are.
You not having a go at me on such a lovely morning are you Malc ?
G you are an honourable exception to the norm, the biggest donkeys seem to get to Westminster as well.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
Remain claimed that upon a leave vote there would be financial chaos unleashed and an emergency budget called. That was a lie.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
What remain promised was deliverable. What leave promised was not.
That's fairly fundamental.
And if you actually read what I wrote, I am not in favour of a referendum because current polling indicates it will not answer anything, either way. I can see the argument why it wouldn't be undemocratic to have one, however, given the mess we're in. Thanks to leaves' lies.
Regarding the debates to be fair to May the one thing she seems to be able to do is grasp the detail. If the debate is kept to the deal then on something so technical she should beat Corbyn. Has he got round to reading the document yet? This won’t be a Corbyn rally
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Until the last few days I was unaware of how far treatment had come in recent years.
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Is there not a danger that we're heading towards a view that it doesn't matter if you get HIV, we can treat it with drugs? What if the drugs stop working?
I don't think anyone would willingly choose to be HIV+ - having to take a drug every day doesn't sound particularly pleasent. And there is definitely a legitimate debate around the availability of 'prep' on the NHS. But noone should be ashamed of having HIV, as Moyle said better to live in knowledge than die in fear.
Diabetes seems like the big health issue of the moment now.
Not really, they are virtually extinct. There is literally a handful of Brexit supporting Labour MPs. They are all aging and mostly facing deselection. In a party where 90% of the membership is now strongly Remain there is absolutely no chance of any openly Brexit supporting candidates being selected. Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer but he is not going to be around forever. In a few years the positions of the Lib Dems and Labour on the EU will be indistinguishable and the Labour leadership will be leading them.
Of the tiny handful of Brexiteer Labour MPs, they've all either lost the whip, been deselected, announced their retirement and/or any or all of the above.
Regarding the debates to be fair to May the one thing she seems to be able to do is grasp the detail. If the debate is kept to the deal then on something so technical she should beat him. Has he got round to reading the document yet? This won’t be a Corbyn rally
Not really, they are virtually extinct. There is literally a handful of Brexit supporting Labour MPs. They are all aging and mostly facing deselection. In a party where 90% of the membership is now strongly Remain there is absolutely no chance of any openly Brexit supporting candidates being selected. Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer but he is not going to be around forever. In a few years the positions of the Lib Dems and Labour on the EU will be indistinguishable and the Labour leadership will be leading them.
Of the tiny handful of Brexiteer Labour MPs, they've all either lost the whip, been deselected, announced their retirement and/or any or all of the above.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
She can plan all she wants, but she has neither the ammunition nor the sophistry to achieve such a feat.
Just watch her. I think Corbyn could be finished in a couple of weeks.
Watch the debate?
I'd rather stick red hot knitting needles into my eyeballs, tbh.
Good. Then we'll be spared any comments from you on it.....
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Is there not a danger that we're heading towards a view that it doesn't matter if you get HIV, we can treat it with drugs? What if the drugs stop working?
I don't think anyone would willingly choose to be HIV+ - having to take a drug every day doesn't sound particularly pleasent. And there is definitely a legitimate debate around the availability of 'prep' on the NHS. But noone should be ashamed of having HIV, as Moyle said better to live in knowledge than die in fear.
Diabetes seems like the big health issue of the moment now.
HIV is now a long term disease like diabetes to be managed to reach normal life expectancy.
It was pretty grim in the 1990s when I would see patients fade away in front of me over a year or so.
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Is there not a danger that we're heading towards a view that it doesn't matter if you get HIV, we can treat it with drugs? What if the drugs stop working?
I don't think anyone would willingly choose to be HIV+ - having to take a drug every day doesn't sound particularly pleasent. And there is definitely a legitimate debate around the availability of 'prep' on the NHS. But noone should be ashamed of having HIV, as Moyle said better to live in knowledge than die in fear.
Diabetes seems like the big health issue of the moment now.
"I don't think anyone would willingly choose to be HIV+"
Sadly, there are people who go out to get HIV. Mrs J did not believe me on this, and the a segment came on Radio 4 about just that. As an example:
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
It's the mass prime time audience she wants; Corbyn is incidental.
She wants both. I think she's planning to humiliate him.
In life as in football everything is made more complicated by the presence of the opposing team.
Corbyn has better people skills, and May's mental rigidity does not come over well in such situations, which is why she has so often funked out of debates in the past.
She may plan to humiliate him, but he may well politely pull the rug out from under her.
Given it's hard to see her surviving the next week weeks/months anyway, its hard to see what she has to lose. People are at their most dangerous when their backs are against the wall.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
Remain claimed that upon a leave vote there would be financial chaos unleashed and an emergency budget called. That was a lie.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
What remain promised was deliverable. What leave promised was not.
That's fairly fundamental.
And if you actually read what I wrote, I am not in favour of a referendum because current polling indicates it will not answer anything, either way. I can see the argument why it wouldn't be undemocratic to have one, however, given the mess we're in. Thanks to leaves' lies.
How was "no further integration" deliverable with us remaining a member? I can't believe we wouldn't have been bounced into it.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
Remain claimed that upon a leave vote there would be financial chaos unleashed and an emergency budget called. That was a lie.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
What remain promised was deliverable. What leave promised was not.
That's fairly fundamental.
And if you actually read what I wrote, I am not in favour of a referendum because current polling indicates it will not answer anything, either way. I can see the argument why it wouldn't be undemocratic to have one, however, given the mess we're in. Thanks to leaves' lies.
Well leave is deliverable in the form of a no-deal Brexit. It's the only way out of the EU now, the deal is too bad.
You can argue that the problems it will cause are not worth it, but you can't claim it is impossible.
I think the downsides are exaggerated and it won't be as bad as they claim (as were their claims about chaos after the leave vote). I also think if they had prepared for no-deal from the beginning like they should have done we'd be in a much stronger position.
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
Remain claimed that upon a leave vote there would be financial chaos unleashed and an emergency budget called. That was a lie.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
What remain promised was deliverable. What leave promised was not.
That's fairly fundamental.
And if you actually read what I wrote, I am not in favour of a referendum because current polling indicates it will not answer anything, either way. I can see the argument why it wouldn't be undemocratic to have one, however, given the mess we're in. Thanks to leaves' lies.
I voted remain and would disagree. For example they said there wouldn’t be an EU army and it was scaremongering - this is not the case. Also remain sold a future where we constrained the EU against its integrationist agenda. I didn’t believe that. I voted remain as I believed the apocalyptic economic projections, and they turned out to be false, but I couldn’t risk it.
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1068363730990350336 Theresa May reveals what she hopes to achieve with the debate: close down any compromise with Labour. Interesting strategy, which means she will need the votes of every one of her MPs and also of the DUP, who have said they will vote against and may actually prefer a soft Brexit if it keeps NI aligned with GB.
Strange strategy since she will need Labour votes to ever have a chance of getting it through.
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
TM strategy is simple. No other deal, no second referendum, this is it.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
Last night's 10% lead for the conservatives had error written all over it but the corrected poll with a 5% lead does give some pause for thought
As I have maintained TM has cut through, despite protestations to the contrary
Be careful though, it's only YouGov that's showing this persistent Tory lead, and the recent changes have only been MoE.
I don't think there's much strong polling evidence to suggest May is cutting through. Looks to me like, to coin a phrase, "nothing has changed".
It's certainly nothing to do with May cutting through.
It is more the fact that has been apparent for some time that Leave voters whose stance on Brexit define their political choices have no credible alternative but to vote Tory. UKIP is a nasty political joke of a party. 62% of Leavers who will vote are voting Tory. The big danger to the Tories is of losing a fair chunk of that 62% who see their views as having been betrayed when events finally play out in 2019.
As Labour has evolved from a party with more of a mix of opinion on the EU, its ability to appeal to eurosceptic voters has dwindled away. However, there is not balancing compensation. Remain voters whose stance on Brexit define their political choices have alternatives: Labour, Lib Dems, SNP even Green. Only 51% of Remainers who vote are chosing Labour.
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Is there not a danger that we're heading towards a view that it doesn't matter if you get HIV, we can treat it with drugs? What if the drugs stop working?
I don't think anyone would willingly choose to be HIV+ - having to take a drug every day doesn't sound particularly pleasent.
A +ve person who is on medication, and has undetectable viral load, cannot pass the virus on. A -ve person on PrEP cannot contract the virus. This is why it's always best for high risk groups to get tested and on medication, whether they know they're +ve or not - that way it's impossible to spread the virus.
The only people who can spread the virus are those people who are +ve and don't know it so aren't being treated and don't have undetectable viral load.
It's a single pill at bedtime. Compared to most chronic conditions, it's painless and symptomless and at best a mild annoyance. The worst side effect in my case is that the drugs slightly raise my blood cholesterol levels.
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Until the last few days I was unaware of how far treatment had come in recent years.
One expert in the field said forced to choose he'd pick HIV over diabetes.
Russell-Moyle did implicitly criticise the 'Don't Die of Ignorance' campaign which I think is unfair - there are tens of thousands (if not more) more people alive in the UK who died in France because the UK government tackled it head on - well done Sir Norman (and Mrs T for not getting in the way).
Off of Brexit, I listened to Lloyd Russell-Moyle's emotive speech last night about his HIV status on the radio and the house reaction. The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
Is there not a danger that we're heading towards a view that it doesn't matter if you get HIV, we can treat it with drugs? What if the drugs stop working?
I don't think anyone would willingly choose to be HIV+ - having to take a drug every day doesn't sound particularly pleasent. And there is definitely a legitimate debate around the availability of 'prep' on the NHS. But noone should be ashamed of having HIV, as Moyle said better to live in knowledge than die in fear.
Diabetes seems like the big health issue of the moment now.
HIV is now a long term disease like diabetes to be managed to reach normal life expectancy.
It was pretty grim in the 1990s when I would see patients fade away in front of me over a year or so.
Yes, so like diabetes we should encourage prevention as better than the cure?
Leaving aside the difficult question of what the question put in a referendum should be, the first tweet is wrong: it could be seen as being undemocratic to hold a referendum if there had previously been one with the same, or similar question, just because the political class don't like the answer they got the first time.
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Both sides lied.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Rubbish. Remain meant Cameron's negotiation. That was clear. That is what the electorate who voted remain were voting on.
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
Remain claimed that upon a leave vote there would be financial chaos unleashed and an emergency budget called. That was a lie.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
What remain promised was deliverable. What leave promised was not.
That's fairly fundamental.
And if you actually read what I wrote, I am not in favour of a referendum because current polling indicates it will not answer anything, either way. I can see the argument why it wouldn't be undemocratic to have one, however, given the mess we're in. Thanks to leaves' lies.
How was "no further integration" deliverable with us remaining a member? I can't believe we wouldn't have been bounced into it.
Exactly. Had we voted Remain there would already be problems looming as we would be the block against the further integration that the EU very desperately needs.
Comments
https://twitter.com/markdiffley1/status/1068421536053370880?s=21
I don't think they'd get it but on the basis that's whatctheyd try for.
The site is rife with people of very different political persuasions arguing that they, or Corby, or Moggsy, could have got a better deal in double-quick time.
Or people arguing if only there were a general election or a people's vote, the result would magically be in accord with their own personal wishes and all problems would be fixed. In fact, all the polling evidence we have suggests that a general election or referendum would yield rather similar, inconclusive results to last time.
Some of the Labour criticism of May has begun to strike me as misogynistic (shades of the Labour treatment of Leanne Wood or Nicola Sturgeon).
(And I am no fan of May and I didn't vote for her).
Past Labour Leaders managed to build up consistent leads over unpopular Tory governments, yet Corbyn has yet to hit a double digit lead over a 'divided' ministry.
No Deal is like the cockroach in the desert, the only thing surviving a nuclear blast. Out it crawls, going about its business. Remainers seem to have been blind to its indestructability...and they have nothing left with which to kill it. Apart from accepting May's deal.
https://twitter.com/theipaper/status/1068424393112604673?s=21
If you are opposed to the deal then there are Tories like Davis, Johnson and that second-rater from the 18th century. If you back the deal then there is May and her loyalists. Labour doesn't get a look in.
The debate might change that, though its effect on public opinion will be quickly superseded by the vote itself.
Corbyn (and Labour) would be in a much stronger & convincing position to call for an election, if there was a ten or fifteen per cent polling lead.
As it is, it just looks like dumb political posturing while the country faces a crisis.
Life returns to normal. Tories lead by 16%, Labour sets about defenestrating Corbyn....
I said: Oh well, the Government fell
And Gavin ----ing Williamson's the end of a bell
Wooooah, the end of a bell...
I missed the drama over YouGov’s poll last night but it looks to me like the actual VI are close to figures we’ve seen from them for months now. Even the last YouGov before this one IIRC was quite different to others a week ago, which either had Labour in the lead or tied. So we’ll see which polllster is right and which one is wrong in the long run. Would love to know what that YouGov model is saying atm from the last GE.
https://twitter.com/tombradby/status/1068432572353576961
https://twitter.com/tombradby/status/1068432923240644608
As for hurtling towards the cliff edge, saying "you voted for this" that is what we need. If we are to get a good deal from Europe they need to think we are willing to head over the cliff and are worried we will take them with us so they jump out of the way.
We need a Vinnie Jones Brexit. NSFW.
https://youtu.be/UyFwViOiAqY
As in Scotland, the signifier effect will probably not diminish with time.
As for the past: in these times I don’t think we should use it as a predictor as to what will happen in the future. May and Corbyn certainly should have both been gone by now according to expectations from the past. May’s survival, especially considering how brutal the Tories have been before with their leaders continues to confound expectations. Corbyn should have never come close to 40% last year by past expectations.
The challenge is would the Tory party let her?
But that's not where we're at. We're in a position where the referendum result is essentially undeliverable, because the winning side lied and made contradictory promises to their voters. This has directly led us into the present mess.
In such circumstances, asking the voters again is perfectly democratic.
However, it's also pointless unless there is a good majority one way or the other, because it will not settle anything.
Meanwhile looks like the Spanish can't build warships that float:
http://amp.timeinc.net/thedrive/the-war-zone/25218/we-have-the-first-official-report-on-norways-sunken-frigate-and-it-isnt-pretty?source=dam
Can't walk down the Govan Rd without some horny handed son of toil stopping me to tell of the honour done to the “important role Scotland plays in shipbuilding and the national security of our country”.
You don’t get maximum PIP points by telling the truth. That’s why it seems so hard when what seem like deserving cases get very little but people suffering ailments that are subjectively unprovable manage to get the full awards.
If remain had won then none of this nonsense about the winning side lying would be brought up and another referendum demanded.
Corbyn has better people skills, and May's mental rigidity does not come over well in such situations, which is why she has so often funked out of debates in the past.
She may plan to humiliate him, but he may well politely pull the rug out from under her.
My former colleague from Australia was an expert in his field (having a phd and excellent commercial experience), but when the company went bust he had a few weeks to leave the country.
Another friend married an Australian women, but she was only allowed to stay in the UK for a limited time each year and they had to live in Portugal the rest of the time.
Whereas chain migration from India and Pakistan seems very easy in comparison.
'Farage told the Mirror: “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”
...In the event of a defeat Farage, who maintains Britain will vote to quit the EU, would exploit claims the referendum was unfair after the Government dubiously spent £9m on a leaflet to every home.'
https://tinyurl.com/yd6adaym
Leave made contradictory promises that were mutually incompatible, and therefore underliverable. Promising one thing to one person, and another contradictory thing to another, is a lie.
We'll see.
I'd rather stick red hot knitting needles into my eyeballs, tbh.
Of course you know this already, so I don't see what you have to gain from pretending this didn't happen.
Well apart from a flimsy justification for another referendum.
As I have maintained TM has cut through, despite protestations to the contrary, and her message is simple to understand. The public are hearing TM confirm we are leaving the EU in March 19, we are taking control of our borders and money, we will do trade deals, and we will not have a second referendum. She continues that voters just want to move on and deal with domestic issues including the NHS and Schools
Contrast that to mps who want to frustrate a deal that was hard won and fight their own ultra positions. Add into the mix labour calling for a GE to frustrate the process and you can see why TM is winning the public vote and labour are looking self indulgent
The country always supports the underdog and when it sees groups of white pale and stale men as evident in the EU and ERG attacking a woman who clearly is well on top of her subject, misogyny plays a role in her support. Significant that she is attracking a lot of female support
It is an irony that some in her party want to depose her, when at present, she is an electoral asset and if they were successful they would hand the batton to labour
Coming to the UK has become a lot more complicated for everyone it seems.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/aug/27/revealed-immigration-rules-have-more-than-doubled-in-length-since-2010
I don't think there's much strong polling evidence to suggest May is cutting through. Looks to me like, to coin a phrase, "nothing has changed".
Maybe she is resigned to it not passing and is wanting justification for a new referendum. Or possibly a no deal Brexit. It's all rather exciting.
The science has moved on so it is treatable, and parliament showed a magnificent example with its reaction to the speech, it will lead public attitude. Whatever happens with Brexit, that we've moved so far was something to be very proud of yesterday.
I'd like to see some polling of Labour share with each of the above mentioned women as leader compared to Corbyn.
This would also be an excellent title for Mrs May's political memoirs.
That's fairly fundamental.
And if you actually read what I wrote, I am not in favour of a referendum because current polling indicates it will not answer anything, either way. I can see the argument why it wouldn't be undemocratic to have one, however, given the mess we're in. Thanks to leaves' lies.
Diabetes seems like the big health issue of the moment now.
Brexiteers should accept her deal, move on and put in hard negotiators to take on the EU and challenge them even in international courts but the way they are behaving risks finishing off their dreams. It is madness by them
It was pretty grim in the 1990s when I would see patients fade away in front of me over a year or so.
Sadly, there are people who go out to get HIV. Mrs J did not believe me on this, and the a segment came on Radio 4 about just that. As an example:
https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/choosing-hiv/#gs.K5aR4Sc
http://www.sfweekly.com/topstories/undercover-look-inside-world-hiv-bug-chasers-gift-givers/
Not that this should reflect on treatments given.
You can argue that the problems it will cause are not worth it, but you can't claim it is impossible.
I think the downsides are exaggerated and it won't be as bad as they claim (as were their claims about chaos after the leave vote). I also think if they had prepared for no-deal from the beginning like they should have done we'd be in a much stronger position.
It is more the fact that has been apparent for some time that Leave voters whose stance on Brexit define their political choices have no credible alternative but to vote Tory. UKIP is a nasty political joke of a party. 62% of Leavers who will vote are voting Tory. The big danger to the Tories is of losing a fair chunk of that 62% who see their views as having been betrayed when events finally play out in 2019.
As Labour has evolved from a party with more of a mix of opinion on the EU, its ability to appeal to eurosceptic voters has dwindled away. However, there is not balancing compensation. Remain voters whose stance on Brexit define their political choices have alternatives: Labour, Lib Dems, SNP even Green. Only 51% of Remainers who vote are chosing Labour.
The only people who can spread the virus are those people who are +ve and don't know it so aren't being treated and don't have undetectable viral load.
It's a single pill at bedtime. Compared to most chronic conditions, it's painless and symptomless and at best a mild annoyance. The worst side effect in my case is that the drugs slightly raise my blood cholesterol levels.
Russell-Moyle did implicitly criticise the 'Don't Die of Ignorance' campaign which I think is unfair - there are tens of thousands (if not more) more people alive in the UK who died in France because the UK government tackled it head on - well done Sir Norman (and Mrs T for not getting in the way).