Well, Dan Hannan is one of those leavers who doesn't want the government to sign the deal that would implement leaving, so I suppose he's at least being consistent with his new position.
He doesn't want to be tainted with Leave. Started the day after the vote when he disavowed the campaign.
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
I thought Ed Miliband was a joke, but he is an absolute colossus compared to the dunce they now have as leader, and I am not sure he would have been a whole lot worse than TMay as PM. Perhaps Mr Meeks could do an alternative history for what would have happened had Ed won. No divisive referendum for a start!
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
I agree that does seem something of an anomaly. It may be explained by the fact that Leave had a large amount of UKIP supporters, who are, according to the researchers the dumbest. My own anecdotal experience of speaking to a few would appear to confirm this. As for it being "snobbish", that is immaterial.
On topic, it'd be interesting to go back further and see what happened if Ken Clarke had won in 2001. I guess we'd be in the euro by now, probably without benefit of a referendum.
I read something today where Irish Gov was apparently worried about the NI police's ability to deal with criminals who fled to the RoI after Brexit as the NI police couldn't use the EAW to get them back. This struck me as a particularly easy problem for the Irish government to solve, given they are free to set any terms for extradition the like!
Brexit in microcosm: create problems for other countries and then say it's up to them to help us fix them.
I thought Ed Miliband was a joke, but he is an absolute colossus compared to the dunce they now have as leader, and I am not sure he would have been a whole lot worse than TMay as PM. Perhaps Mr Meeks could do an alternative history for what would have happened had Ed won. No divisive referendum for a start!
I think an Ed Miliband government would have been very similar to that of his hero across the Channel, François Hollande - in other words, an embarrassing failure, but not a national disaster along the lines of the Venezuelan heroes of Corbyn.
I thought Ed Miliband was a joke, but he is an absolute colossus compared to the dunce they now have as leader, and I am not sure he would have been a whole lot worse than TMay as PM. Perhaps Mr Meeks could do an alternative history for what would have happened had Ed won. No divisive referendum for a start!
If the muse ever flutters on me again, I'll see what I can do.
Next up though will be my review of last year's predictions (respectable for once) and, much more dauntingly, predictions for 2019.
US agribusiness lobbyists paid for trip by David Davis
The Oklahoma-based organisation, the E Foundation, paid £5,362 to Davis, who was accompanied by fellow Brexiter Owen Paterson on the trip last month. The organisation represents agricultural and energy interests.
Isn't that an incredibly stupid thing to say? If there is another vote and Remain narrowly wins, then it'll be his fault because some Leavers abstained on his advice.
I'm unconvinced that a collective refusal to vote is a powerful way to achieve victory in a democratic process.
But, I've long said that a referendum between May's Deal and Remain would see Leaver turnout depressed.
Mr. Nakht, I consistently slammed Miliband's stupid price cap policy, and attacked May for the same thing. Whilst political partisanship does exist, it isn't universal.
The commentary on here is normally fine and people get called out for being inconsistent, I generally meant politicians criticising the opposition policy until the moment they change it to their own.
On topic, it'd be interesting to go back further and see what happened if Ken Clarke had won in 2001. I guess we'd be in the euro by now, probably without benefit of a referendum.
Ken Clarke would have made a good PM. I voted for him in the 2001 leadership election as I thought IDS was hopelessly out of his depth even in the leadership contest and his tenure of Tory leader validated my view he was inept!
As for the Euro, I did not support joining that and was opposed to it. I think KC if he had been leader might have learned to put joining the Euro on the back burner.
I thought Ed Miliband was a joke, but he is an absolute colossus compared to the dunce they now have as leader, and I am not sure he would have been a whole lot worse than TMay as PM. Perhaps Mr Meeks could do an alternative history for what would have happened had Ed won. No divisive referendum for a start!
I think an Ed Miliband government would have been very similar to that of his hero across the Channel, François Hollande - in other words, an embarrassing failure, but not a national disaster along the lines of the Venezuelan heroes of Corbyn.
Is Corbyn still enamoured with Venezuela? Perhaps "The Jezziah" (whom I think might actually be Diane Abbott) may be able to tell us. She/he does seem to be on first name terms with many of the Labour movers and misogynists
The ingratitude of the public. Fancy not relishing the opportunity to die a glorious death, albeit through lack of medicines, in pursuit of the glittering prize that is no deal Brexit?
It may seem to be taking it too seriously, but the entire sequence of events seems to be outlining a certain aspect of the British psyche.
Over in the US, the gun control debate is hampered by the issue that Americans have this fantasy of the Wild West as their identity and history, harking to a fictionalised time - a distorted retelling of history as fantasy. Every time the debate is run, it hits the same rocks that this fantasy is subsumed at a visceral level into the identity of many Americans.
Over here, we have the entire attempt to reach a common outlook foundering on similar rocks of identity, again fuelled by a fictionalised time, of plucky little Britain standing alone, an exceptionalism, an idealisation of dogged stiff-upper-lippism and the cult of the amateur over the professional, and of pulling it out of the fire at the last moment without putting in the hard yards first. That "they" will comply with us, that all we need is the Dunkirk spirit, that it is difficult but "we" (an expanded and generic "we" that isn't actually our children, our colleagues, our family, ourselves, but a kind of mystical belongingness) just have to be strong, and we can be.
There is a time and a place for standing firm and refusing to admit doubt. That time and place is not when things are complicated, we don't really know what's coming up, our pre-existing assumptions are shown to be completely wrong, and our loved ones are relying on us to actually get it right, because they're vulnerable to us getting it wrong.
In short, sometimes getting it right is more important than ego.
Other than your complete dismissal of the idea that we can’t make it on our own and the uncalled for negativity of that paragraph, which I profoundly disagree with, your post is actually sensible. Whether we make a success of Brexit depends upon how we deal with it. Some problems we have are of our making regardless of the EU - poor productivity, poor infrastructure etc Some are definitely caused by the EU - over regulation, abandin,eng that of fishing, over taxation, over reliance on immigration making us a cheap labour low skilled economy etc
The only reason I would accept your defeatism is agreement with the author’s comment that the Tories have run out of ideas. If that continues, Brexit will be a disaster. If we address the issues we face, some of which are EU related, we’ll thrive.
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
"Intelligence" is subjective, but there's no doubt that Labour voters are now better-educated than Tory voters.
In something else that would go against PBTories' delusions - if only people in employment were allowed to vote, Corbyn would be PM now (since the Tories were so reliant on retirees).
Isn't that an incredibly stupid thing to say? If there is another vote and Remain narrowly wins, then it'll be his fault because some Leavers abstained on his advice.
Maybe he understands that No Deal Brexit will wreck the economy!
I’m feeling very festive today but upcoming travel and festivities will mean limited visits to PB over Christmas. May I wish all contributors a very merry Christmas and Festive season. May all your comments be pithy and concise, and with an unerring level of foresight. Thank you to those who run the site and contribute to what is to me the best and most diverse political news source and has been for the last 10 years.
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
"Intelligence" is subjective, but there's no doubt that Labour voters are now better-educated than Tory voters.
In something else that would go against PBTories' delusions - if only people in employment were allowed to vote, Corbyn would be PM now (since the Tories were so reliant on retirees).
Intelligence is not subjective at all it is highly measurable, which is why I think it should be a prerequisite for anyone wanting to hold high office. Sorry, Mr. Corbyn....
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
"Intelligence" is subjective, but there's no doubt that Labour voters are now better-educated than Tory voters.
In something else that would go against PBTories' delusions - if only people in employment were allowed to vote, Corbyn would be PM now (since the Tories were so reliant on retirees).
Workers voting for the workers' party. Reassuring to know.
Other than your complete dismissal of the idea that we can’t make it on our own and the uncalled for negativity of that paragraph, which I profoundly disagree with, your post is actually sensible. Whether we make a success of Brexit depends upon how we deal with it. Some problems we have are of our making regardless of the EU - poor productivity, poor infrastructure etc Some are definitely caused by the EU - over regulation, abandin,eng that of fishing, over taxation, over reliance on immigration making us a cheap labour low skilled economy etc
The only reason I would accept your defeatism is agreement with the author’s comment that the Tories have run out of ideas. If that continues, Brexit will be a disaster. If we address the issues we face, some of which are EU related, we’ll thrive.
That's the thing.
No-one can make it on their own. It's kind of the biggest lesson of the modern, interconnected world. We all need others - and Britain's biggest strength has always been its ability to get the help of others. It's one reason we've ended up with the greatest level of soft power in the world.
Our ability to work with others, contribute and receive assistance, bring in and give out soft power - these are the British characteristics, and these are the things we're now turning away from in the name of a mythologised past that never was. Every step down the Leaver path has been a further and further reduction of working-with-others, and now they're calling for "WTO rules" (the bare minimum of structure with others) and "managed no-deal" (we'll just do it on our own and good old British pluck will do)
All very good reasons that no deal is now the optimum course. Free trade agreements, if they take place, if they take place at all, should be about trade. Dragging Gibraltar and Cyprus is totally counterproductive and willingness to give up fishing just shows how out London based positions don’t care for either wealth creation in the rest of the country which is one of the reasons Leave won in the first place. Fishing is the only way to revitalise many of our coastal communities. It’s importance to the EU also shows how vacuous Remain arguments are that the UK has nothing of value for the EU and is doomed to be the beggar at the feast in any negotiations.
Err, no. The way to absolutely guarantee a totally disastrous negotiation with the EU is to crash out and then have to come running back to them in panic to rescue us from the chaos. That really would be the worst of all possible worlds.
Hardly. Trade will flow if it’s the interests of the buyer and seller. It might become more costly and time consuming but if the EU don’t want access to our markets and won’t allow access to UK companies to theirs then we made the right decision to Leave. Being held to political ransom for a trade agreement as worthless as the withdrawal agreement is not worth spending time on frankly. We had 40 years of being in the EU and it didn’t work for far too many parts of the country.
Your second sentence and third sentence taken together give the answer. Making it more costly decreases the likelihood of it being in their mutual interests and would directly reduce it at the margins. Making it more time consuming decreases the likelihood of it being in their mutual interests and would directly reduce it at the margins. Doing both simultaneously gives a double whammy, and significantly broadens those margins. Reducing the trade in those margins can add to the costs and times for the other ones, further broadening those margins. It stabilises eventually, but only after you've sacrificed a chunk of British livelihoods and options to the British buyer.
You then argue we made the right decision to Leave, if the disruption and costs incurred solely by Leaving have consequences, which is rather a self-referencing argument.
Bit more complicated than that. Depends on whether it’s a technical sell or commodity product, competition and Avila ility of alternative supplies, whether or not you are end customer specified, what happens to fx rates actual cost increase and actual length of any delay.
Other than your complete dismissal of the idea that we can’t make it on our own and the uncalled for negativity of that paragraph, which I profoundly disagree with, your post is actually sensible. Whether we make a success of Brexit depends upon how we deal with it. Some problems we have are of our making regardless of the EU - poor productivity, poor infrastructure etc Some are definitely caused by the EU - over regulation, abandin,eng that of fishing, over taxation, over reliance on immigration making us a cheap labour low skilled economy etc
The only reason I would accept your defeatism is agreement with the author’s comment that the Tories have run out of ideas. If that continues, Brexit will be a disaster. If we address the issues we face, some of which are EU related, we’ll thrive.
That's the thing.
No-one can make it on their own. It's kind of the biggest lesson of the modern, interconnected world. We all need others - and Britain's biggest strength has always been its ability to get the help of others. It's one reason we've ended up with the greatest level of soft power in the world.
Our ability to work with others, contribute and receive assistance, bring in and give out soft power - these are the British characteristics, and these are the things we're now turning away from in the name of a mythologised past that never was. Every step down the Leaver path has been a further and further reduction of working-with-others, and now they're calling for "WTO rules" (the bare minimum of structure with others) and "managed no-deal" (we'll just do it on our own and good old British pluck will do)
No one can make it without trade - unless of course you are totally agrarian. Other than the EU however, no trade agreement requires membership of a political union.
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
"Intelligence" is subjective, but there's no doubt that Labour voters are now better-educated than Tory voters.
In something else that would go against PBTories' delusions - if only people in employment were allowed to vote, Corbyn would be PM now (since the Tories were so reliant on retirees).
Just had a better look at this. For your simplistic statistical analysis I award you an E-grade, based on when grade inflation had pushed an E to it's nadir, and therefore even lower than Mr. Corbyn's two A-levels.
Ammianus Marcellinus realised the daftness of fixing commodity prices in the 4th century AD. Rather depressing he was more than 17 centuries ahead of Miliband and May.
Ammianus Marcellinus realised the daftness of fixing commodity prices in the 4th century AD. Rather depressing he was more than 17 centuries ahead of Miliband and May.
Counterfactual history - go off to alternatehistory.com (where one or two of us have posted down the years). Would a REMAIN win have thwarted a Trump victory in the autumn of 2016? The notion of May, Merkel and Clinton (doubtless to be dubbed "the three witches" by some) at the G8 all trying to deal with Putin is intriguing.
Otherwise it's a reasonable stab by Antifrank though I'm doubtful Ed M would return as Labour leader.
I've done the shopping so for a few hours I'm a man of leisure. A brief rally by the DJIA and FTSE on the back of some positive comments by the Fed chairman seems already to be running out of steam and there's a bearish mood out there.
I'm relieved Gatwick is operational again - lessons to be learned and there's clearly anti-drone technology out there for airports if they want it.
David Gauke opines the Prime Minister is opposed to No Deal - well, of course, for her the WA is the only game in town. Once again, IF the WA falls, the only options are leaving on 29/3/19 without a Deal and revoking A50 cancelling the departure completely. The latter would be political and electoral suicide for the Conservatives so No Deal it would be with all the frantic last-minute half-baked planning we can do to mitigate some if not all the consequences.
It's a question that not even the tried and trusted last gap 'I'm a fool who didn't know what I was doing' defence can answer since you have to have a reason you wanted to sign a petition, you had to have thought about it to some degree.
Other than the prospect of an early GE there's really no reason Labour should not withdraw the whip from WIlliamson, since he'll continue to passionately support the party as an independent but they can avoid facing questions about him periodically.
I thought Ed Miliband was a joke, but he is an absolute colossus compared to the dunce they now have as leader, and I am not sure he would have been a whole lot worse than TMay as PM. Perhaps Mr Meeks could do an alternative history for what would have happened had Ed won. No divisive referendum for a start!
I think an Ed Miliband government would have been very similar to that of his hero across the Channel, François Hollande - in other words, an embarrassing failure, but not a national disaster along the lines of the Venezuelan heroes of Corbyn.
Is Corbyn still enamoured with Venezuela? Perhaps "The Jezziah" (whom I think might actually be Diane Abbott) may be able to tell us. She/he does seem to be on first name terms with many of the Labour movers and misogynists
Corbyn et al have gone rather quiet about Venezuela recently, but some of the even nuttier UK lefties are still keen. If you want a good laugh, read here about how life under Chavez and now Maduro is wonderful:
Like me you probably missed the conference on the 1st December where you could have heard Chris Williamson MP (that name again!) explaining it all to you:
Excellent header; and a reminder that, whichever side you are on, we are in a tough place. We have got ourselves a double dose of democratic deficit: the EU itself suffers from a deficiency of it (for example no one really thinks they can influence an EU matter by how they vote in EU elections), and critically the process by which we got here from 1972 onwards leaves at least a substantial minority - but certainly enough - of the population believing that it has been done without the whole hearted consultation and consent of the UK population. It is much easier to create a democratic deficit than it is to resolve it, which is why there can be no quick fixes. No Referendum would have fixed nothing. Voting Remain wouldn't either. Thanks for reminding us.
Comments
First one is that most Con voters are Leave and most Lab voters are Remain. But ok, let's be kind and point out that correlation is not causation. Also perhaps a bit snobbish to claim that Leave voters are generally less intelligent than Remain ones.
However the second problem is not so easily brushed aside. The article is by Toby Young.
Next up though will be my review of last year's predictions (respectable for once) and, much more dauntingly, predictions for 2019.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/21/us-agribusiness-lobbyists-paid-for-trip-by-david-davis
US agribusiness lobbyists paid for trip by David Davis
The Oklahoma-based organisation, the E Foundation, paid £5,362 to Davis, who was accompanied by fellow Brexiter Owen Paterson on the trip last month. The organisation represents agricultural and energy interests.
As for the Euro, I did not support joining that and was opposed to it. I think KC if he had been leader might have learned to put joining the Euro on the back burner.
The only reason I would accept your defeatism is agreement with the author’s comment that the Tories have run out of ideas. If that continues, Brexit will be a disaster. If we address the issues we face, some of which are EU related, we’ll thrive.
In 2017, Labour had a 17-point lead with uni graduates, while the Tories had a 22-point lead among people who had no qualifications above GCSE level: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election
In something else that would go against PBTories' delusions - if only people in employment were allowed to vote, Corbyn would be PM now (since the Tories were so reliant on retirees).
No-one can make it on their own. It's kind of the biggest lesson of the modern, interconnected world.
We all need others - and Britain's biggest strength has always been its ability to get the help of others. It's one reason we've ended up with the greatest level of soft power in the world.
Our ability to work with others, contribute and receive assistance, bring in and give out soft power - these are the British characteristics, and these are the things we're now turning away from in the name of a mythologised past that never was. Every step down the Leaver path has been a further and further reduction of working-with-others, and now they're calling for "WTO rules" (the bare minimum of structure with others) and "managed no-deal" (we'll just do it on our own and good old British pluck will do)
Ammianus Marcellinus realised the daftness of fixing commodity prices in the 4th century AD. Rather depressing he was more than 17 centuries ahead of Miliband and May.
Counterfactual history - go off to alternatehistory.com (where one or two of us have posted down the years). Would a REMAIN win have thwarted a Trump victory in the autumn of 2016? The notion of May, Merkel and Clinton (doubtless to be dubbed "the three witches" by some) at the G8 all trying to deal with Putin is intriguing.
Otherwise it's a reasonable stab by Antifrank though I'm doubtful Ed M would return as Labour leader.
I've done the shopping so for a few hours I'm a man of leisure. A brief rally by the DJIA and FTSE on the back of some positive comments by the Fed chairman seems already to be running out of steam and there's a bearish mood out there.
I'm relieved Gatwick is operational again - lessons to be learned and there's clearly anti-drone technology out there for airports if they want it.
David Gauke opines the Prime Minister is opposed to No Deal - well, of course, for her the WA is the only game in town. Once again, IF the WA falls, the only options are leaving on 29/3/19 without a Deal and revoking A50 cancelling the departure completely. The latter would be political and electoral suicide for the Conservatives so No Deal it would be with all the frantic last-minute half-baked planning we can do to mitigate some if not all the consequences.
Other than the prospect of an early GE there's really no reason Labour should not withdraw the whip from WIlliamson, since he'll continue to passionately support the party as an independent but they can avoid facing questions about him periodically.
UK retail sales up 3.6% annually while in France they are down 2.0% annually.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/businessindustryandtrade/retailindustry/bulletins/retailsales/november2018
https://www.insee.fr/en/statistiques/3685168
https://www.venezuelasolidarity.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Social-Progress-briefing.pdf
That document was updated in September this year!
Like me you probably missed the conference on the 1st December where you could have heard Chris Williamson MP (that name again!) explaining it all to you:
https://www.venezuelasolidarity.co.uk/event-20-years-since-chavezs-election-a-global-spark-for-21st-century-socialism-latin-american-liberation/
NEW THREAD
I remember one that had Oswald Moseley leading the Labour Party.
A nice piece by Mr M. I'm looking forward to next year's instalment looking at the counterfactual of May's deal passing.