Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
I don't think one is in a position to throw stones when it comes to voting for donkey's with rosettes. No party comes out of that looking good.
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
Oh how we forget. Ed Balls was part of the coterie of Death Eaters around Gordon Brown, happy to be part of really, really dark arts.
Balls is and was awesome.
A towering intellectual giant compared to the collection of dweebs, dullards, clowns, comedians and quarterwits that pollute the front benches of today.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
I think Conservative voters are less loyal than Labour. Tony Blair understood how to win a majority by targeting close run seats. Labour have the ten safest seats in the commons - not necessarily the best thing
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
He starts off well, and then it all goes a bit unicorn poop. Of course, he stands no chance at all against the machine politicians.
Yes and his flagship policy of universal basic income is unlikely to appeal to enough voters, and was pretty much debunked in a previous episode of Freakonomics podcast. It sounded like he wanted to get his ideas out there to gel a position in a future administration.
You do keep maintaining it is but if ERG and DUP do support it it virtually passes
Sammy was also sounding a lot less less strident. Looks like things are starting to move...
Mathematically, it can be done almost exclusively from the leave side. The deal needs 116 switchers to pass: there are ca. 109 Leave rebels on the Tory benches and perhaps half a dozen Labour Leave opponents of the deal, and the DUP smelling the coffee would be a major boon. Realistically though, May does need elements of different tribes, especially a number of Labour in Leave areas, to switch, the chances of all the leavers switching are remote.
As a few indicated second thoughts last week, some on here saw the tide turning and, obviously, it didn't, so I'm not getting ahead of myself in thinking this will happen, but fingers crossed.
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
While any sane adult is preferable to Trump, it is not required for all sane adults to stand!
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
Well, I've already learned he's a man, which is a start. And, in what seems like a startling coincidence, that he was born in Schenectady, NY, a place I had never heard of until literally 3 hours ago when I read Slaughterhouse 5 for the first time and thought what a peculiar name it was
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
I think Conservative voters are less loyal than Labour. Tony Blair understood how to win a majority by targeting close run seats. Labour have the ten safest seats in the commons - not necessarily the best thing
You do keep maintaining it is but if ERG and DUP do support it it virtually passes
Sammy was also sounding a lot less less strident. Looks like things are starting to move...
Mathematically, it can be done almost exclusively from the leave side. The deal needs 116 switchers to pass: there are ca. 109 Leave rebels on the Tory benches and perhaps half a dozen Labour Leave opponents of the deal. Realistically though, May does need elements of different tribes, especially a number of Labour in Leave areas, to switch, the chances of all the leavers switching are remote. And the DUP smelling the coffee would help her a hell of a lot.
As a few indicated second thoughts last week, some on here saw the tide turning and, obviously, it didn't, so I'm not getting ahead of myself in thinking this will happen, but fingers crossed.
If May gets within a handful, then all the Brexit horror-show outcomes belong Remainers, trying to thwart the will of the Referendum outcome......
I suspect at that point, abstainers will start crawling out the Labour wodwork.
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
While any sane adult is preferable to Trump, it is not required for all sane adults to stand!
Blimey. Is this the widest open field in decades? There are 30 names there.
It points to the lack of an obvious Dem leader, other than Pelosi, who is Speaker.
You do keep maintaining it is but if ERG and DUP do support it it virtually passes
Sammy was also sounding a lot less less strident. Looks like things are starting to move...
Mathematically, it can be done almost exclusively from the leave side. The deal needs 116 switchers to pass: there are ca. 109 Leave rebels on the Tory benches and perhaps half a dozen Labour Leave opponents of the deal. Realistically though, May does need elements of different tribes, especially a number of Labour in Leave areas, to switch, the chances of all the leavers switching are remote. And the DUP smelling the coffee would help her a hell of a lot.
As a few indicated second thoughts last week, some on here saw the tide turning and, obviously, it didn't, so I'm not getting ahead of myself in thinking this will happen, but fingers crossed.
I’ve been arguing for days that a time limit on the backstop should be achievable, and it would therefore be transitional. That would allow ERG and DUP to fall in line due to the unique nature of the border - only significant land border. It would also mean that if the EU tried to screw us over in the trade negotiations then we could use it as a time limited extension of access before no deal.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
My wife would vote for your cat, with or without a blue rosette
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
I think Conservative voters are less loyal than Labour. Tony Blair understood how to win a majority by targeting close run seats. Labour have the ten safest seats in the commons - not necessarily the best thing
The first safest seat for the Conservatives is 37th in the analysis, belonging to Christopher Chope in in the constituency of Christchurch
Well that's depressing.
Yes it’s a while since I read the article but It struck me at the time as significant in how Labour were so far behind in seats despite being close in votes. Corbyn is very popular for old style socialist labour supporters, which ensures massive support in existing Labour seats whilst driving voters in marginals to vote Tory
You do keep maintaining it is but if ERG and DUP do support it it virtually passes
Sammy was also sounding a lot less less strident. Looks like things are starting to move...
Mathematically, it can be done almost exclusively from the leave side. The deal needs 116 switchers to pass: there are ca. 109 Leave rebels on the Tory benches and perhaps half a dozen Labour Leave opponents of the deal. Realistically though, May does need elements of different tribes, especially a number of Labour in Leave areas, to switch, the chances of all the leavers switching are remote. And the DUP smelling the coffee would help her a hell of a lot.
As a few indicated second thoughts last week, some on here saw the tide turning and, obviously, it didn't, so I'm not getting ahead of myself in thinking this will happen, but fingers crossed.
I’ve been arguing for days that a time limit on the backstop should be achievable
Many things should be. But it's down to the Irish now.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
PB Labour would vote for a parrot with a red rosette too, it works both ways.
Imagine on BBC1 interesting about the political playwright James Graham
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
Oh how we forget. Ed Balls was part of the coterie of Death Eaters around Gordon Brown, happy to be part of really, really dark arts.
Balls is and was awesome.
A towering intellectual giant compared to the collection of dweebs, dullards, clowns, comedians and quarterwits that pollute the front benches of today.
The more the merrier. I suspect I'm more aware of US politics than the average person, but less than a true US political anorak, and the names I don't think I really recognise are Delaney, Gabbard, Inslee, Yang, Garcetti, Merkley and Swalwell.
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
Well, I've already learned he's a man, which is a start. And, in what seems like a startling coincidence, that he was born in Schenectady, NY, a place I had never heard of until literally 3 hours ago when I read Slaughterhouse 5 for the first time and thought what a peculiar name it was
There’s a name for that phenomenon - but I don’t know it - it’s a known thing. I get it all the time. Very odd.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
I am with thephone.coop. It is a reseller using talktalk wholesale for the backhaul and local loop unbundling (LLU). The prices are good and quality is reliable.
If you want good WiFi then either buy a better router than the one provided by your ISP or use powerline extenders if you have a large house.
Thank you. Appreciate it.
Also worth considering the post office, as their telephone support for broadband is the only really fast service I've ever encountered. None of this press 3, then press 6, then hear the messages, then wait 20 minutes stuff. A human answers the phone within half a minute. Good value offers, too - not quite the cheapest but perfectly reasonable.
The Tories have not really had a leader worthy of the name since Thatcher - none of her successors has tried to take the party out of its comfort zone or challenged the unrealistic preconceptions of its membership. May is the latest in a long line of mediocrities who have placed the prejudices of the ageing, shrinking band of activists ahead of everything else, including those of the country. History will not look kindly on any of them, May least of all.
How does Cameron fit in that? For all his many faults, he did modernise the party, before the reactionaries took it back.
Which shows he never modernised it. He ended up doing what Blair did - he pushed his party to its extreme.
Rather, it shows that "modernisation" is a dead end. The traditionalists push back.
Not at all! It shows its cyclical, you can't and don't have endless modernisation but it is needed.
Not to forget that modernisers like Blair and Cameron won elections and changed laws through their modernisation that will likely never be reversed. While traditionalists like IDS and Corbyn have wallowed on the opposition benches.
I'd argue Thatcher was very much a moderniser of her day too. Just of a different style.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
My wife would vote for your cat, with or without a blue rosette
Much obliged. Her policy priorities are a larger winter heating allowance and much shorter working days.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
I think Conservative voters are less loyal than Labour. Tony Blair understood how to win a majority by targeting close run seats. Labour have the ten safest seats in the commons - not necessarily the best thing
The first safest seat for the Conservatives is 37th in the analysis, belonging to Christopher Chope in in the constituency of Christchurch
Well that's depressing.
Yes it’s a while since I read the article but It struck me at the time as significant in how Labour were so far behind in seats despite being close in votes. Corbyn is very popular for old style socialist labour supporters, which ensures massive support in existing Labour seats whilst driving voters in marginals to vote Tory
Nice theory, too bad it's contradicted by the facts: the swing to Labour in 2017 was higher in seats the Tories were defending than in seats Labour was defending.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
My wife would vote for your cat, with or without a blue rosette
Much obliged. Her policy priorities are a larger winter heating allowance and much shorter working days.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
I always frame it as an open door so that Bulgarians could pick our strawberries. It sounds less tragic and wastefully mediocre but is more accurate
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
My wife would vote for your cat, with or without a blue rosette
Much obliged. Her policy priorities are a larger winter heating allowance and much shorter working days.
Your cat is a menace and must be opposed at election time.
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Trouble is they clearly believe if they cannot stop no deal - which they think they can - the Tories will be blamed more.
I am with thephone.coop. It is a reseller using talktalk wholesale for the backhaul and local loop unbundling (LLU). The prices are good and quality is reliable.
If you want good WiFi then either buy a better router than the one provided by your ISP or use powerline extenders if you have a large house.
Thank you. Appreciate it.
Also worth considering the post office, as their telephone support for broadband is the only really fast service I've ever encountered. None of this press 3, then press 6, then hear the messages, then wait 20 minutes stuff. A human answers the phone within half a minute. Good value offers, too - not quite the cheapest but perfectly reasonable.
Good tip. Customer service is one thing that really separates high speed broadband suppliers these days, as there isn’t that much variance in price or quality.
Regarding the press 3, press 6 thing. There’s a great life hack for that: use that pause button on your mobile after saving a number (it appears as a comma). It remembers the combo as part of your number so you don’t have to punch it in everytime. Absolute godsend for credit card companies “punch in the 16 digit number followed by the expiry date”. Not any more!
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
Oh how we forget. Ed Balls was part of the coterie of Death Eaters around Gordon Brown, happy to be part of really, really dark arts.
Balls is and was awesome.
A towering intellectual giant compared to the collection of dweebs, dullards, clowns, comedians and quarterwits that pollute the front benches of today.
Are you back posting here, Yvette?
Quarterwits appears not to be a word.
But it is outstanding. I love it.
I suspect you are Sean_T with a proxy name.
He can have my account for a tithe of his royalties!
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Trouble is they clearly believe if they cannot stop no deal - which they think they can - the Tories will be blamed more.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
It really isn't. It's to stop Bureaucrats picking our sovereignty.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
.
I think Conservative voters are less loyal than Labour. Tony Blair understood how to win a majority by targeting close run seats. Labour have the ten safest seats in the commons - not necessarily the best thing
The first safest seat for the Conservatives is 37th in the analysis, belonging to Christopher Chope in in the constituency of Christchurch
Well that's depressing.
Yes it’s a while since I read the article but It struck me at the time as significant in how Labour were so far behind in seats despite being close in votes. Corbyn is very popular for old style socialist labour supporters, which ensures massive support in existing Labour seats whilst driving voters in marginals to vote Tory
Nice theory, too bad it's contradicted by the facts: the swing to Labour in 2017 was higher in seats the Tories were defending than in seats Labour was defending.
I’m not sure of your logic. Labour really solidified their solid seats and got lots of votes in no hoper seats like my own where they doubled the votes on 2015 to 6000 and actually helped the Tory get a much bigger majority in what was a LD seat until 2015. Votes in safe seats for Labour or Tory are less valuable in FPTP, and if the Swing in Tory defending seats had been useful votes it would have resulted in more seats.
I dunno, TMay looks hopelessly incompetent right now but you have to wait to see the outcome.
Imagine parliament "forces" a Remain vs Deal referendum on her. A few months from now we could easily have: * Brexit cancelled * Con leading in polls * TMay still PM * Her enemies marginalized, feuding and discredited
...and people will be asking if she planned the whole thing.
A remainer drug ridden fantasy I'd suggest
Which part don't you buy?
I can imagine Brexit cancelled but the idea there'd still be a functioning Tory party afterwards is shall we say politely a tad unlikely.
If Brexit gets cancelled, then I think Farage's new party will be riding high in the polls.
If Brexit were cancelled after a referendum, a Farage party would have some tricky positioning to do.
Why? 38% or so favour a No Deal Brexit. That 's a large constituency.
28% according to ICM. It’s vaguely reassuring that less than a third of my countrymen and women are imbeciles.
Worth noting again in the spirit of fairness that 26% of that 28% 'No Dealers' are actually imbecilic Remainers who think No Deal means stay in.
Worth noting this place used to have a ban on reposting nonsense from twitter polls...
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Trouble is they clearly believe if they cannot stop no deal - which they think they can - the Tories will be blamed more.
Labour inner circle strategists want a Tory No Deal Brexit.
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Trouble is they clearly believe if they cannot stop no deal - which they think they can - the Tories will be blamed more.
Not sure what you mean
I mean no deal happening will hit not Labour harder than the Tories, so it is not a horrible career move. That's been a problem on many sides, that no deal is more attractive, politically, than many make out.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
My wife would vote for your cat, with or without a blue rosette
Much obliged. Her policy priorities are a larger winter heating allowance and much shorter working days.
Your cat is a menace and must be opposed at election time.
I wouldn’t worrry, as you may already have inferred, she isn’t the most proactive of campaigners.
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Trouble is they clearly believe if they cannot stop no deal - which they think they can - the Tories will be blamed more.
Not sure what you mean
I mean no deal happening will hit not Labour harder than the Tories, so it is not a horrible career move. That's been a problem on many sides, that no deal is more attractive, politically, than many make out.
Dunno about that. Tory voters are at least somewhat keen on No Deal. Labour voters will be apoplectic.
Still struggling to see how we avoid a No Deal departure. I just don’t see hundreds of career politicians having the ability, the bravery, to put the country first. There’s just too much incentive to carry on not finding a solution.
If you're a career politician, particularly if you're a Labour one, backing or allowing No Deal to happen is a horrible career move.
Trouble is they clearly believe if they cannot stop no deal - which they think they can - the Tories will be blamed more.
Not sure what you mean
I mean no deal happening will hit not Labour harder than the Tories, so it is not a horrible career move. That's been a problem on many sides, that no deal is more attractive, politically, than many make out.
Dunno about that. Tory voters are at least somewhat keen on No Deal. Labour voters will be apoplectic.
How many times have we heard the refrain that this is a Tory Brexit? That it happened because of them, has been led by them, has been messed up by them? Somehow I don't think tribalists will have difficulty sticking to that position even though Labour could, through epic u turns, prevent no deal anytime they like.
This scenario does presume no deal is indeed obviously bad, and thus the Tories do not retain the support they may well seemingly get because their voters say they are happy with no deal.
I love that article about making Merkels name into a verb. I’d love to know of other Politicians names that have made it popular use. Obviously the blend word gerrymander which is one of my favourite words of all time.
Also which Politcians deserve to have their own. I think at the moment David Davis would be my favourite for a kind of clueless misreading of a situation - I just happily davis-ed my way around the party and only found out later the hosts had had a fight and split up.
I’m not sure of your logic. Labour really solidified their solid seats and got lots of votes in no hoper seats like my own where they doubled the votes on 2015 to 6000 and actually helped the Tory get a much bigger majority in what was a LD seat until 2015. Votes in safe seats for Labour or Tory are less valuable in FPTP, and if the Swing in Tory defending seats had been useful votes it would have resulted in more seats.
Even if was true that Labour was wasting votes just by racking up votes in safe Tory seats, it would still contradict your original claim that Labour was only racking up votes in their own safe seats.
But, in any case, you're still not quite right. Labour actually won a few more seats (and the Tories a few less) in 2017 than the uniform swing indicated -- a 2.4% lead "should" have resulted in 323 seats for the Tories and 259 for Labour, based on swings from 2015. And additionally there were bigger-than-average swings in some of the Tory seats which Labour just missed out on gaining. Right now, based on uniform swing from 2017, Labour need "only" a 7% lead in the popular vote to gain a majority, as compared to 2015, when uniform swing indicated they needed a 12% lead.
It was Ed Miliband in 2015 who made the Labour vote very inefficiently distributed and just "stacked up votes in safe Labour seats", whereas Corbyn in 2017 actually reversed the trend a bit and achieved bigger swings "where it matters".
Also worth considering the post office, as their telephone support for broadband is the only really fast service I've ever encountered. None of this press 3, then press 6, then hear the messages, then wait 20 minutes stuff. A human answers the phone within half a minute. Good value offers, too - not quite the cheapest but perfectly reasonable.
Good tip. Customer service is one thing that really separates high speed broadband suppliers these days, as there isn’t that much variance in price or quality.
Regarding the press 3, press 6 thing. There’s a great life hack for that: use that pause button on your mobile after saving a number (it appears as a comma). It remembers the combo as part of your number so you don’t have to punch it in everytime. Absolute godsend for credit card companies “punch in the 16 digit number followed by the expiry date”. Not any more!
That sounds wonderful, but I don't recognise a pause button on my iPhone - can you explain a bit more?
Also worth considering the post office, as their telephone support for broadband is the only really fast service I've ever encountered. None of this press 3, then press 6, then hear the messages, then wait 20 minutes stuff. A human answers the phone within half a minute. Good value offers, too - not quite the cheapest but perfectly reasonable.
Good tip. Customer service is one thing that really separates high speed broadband suppliers these days, as there isn’t that much variance in price or quality.
Regarding the press 3, press 6 thing. There’s a great life hack for that: use that pause button on your mobile after saving a number (it appears as a comma). It remembers the combo as part of your number so you don’t have to punch it in everytime. Absolute godsend for credit card companies “punch in the 16 digit number followed by the expiry date”. Not any more!
That sounds wonderful, but I don't recognise a pause button on my iPhone - can you explain a bit more?
Sure.
Usually there is a button on the bottom left of your keypad that allows you to toggle special characters when entering a phone number (# and the like). One of these characters is Pause (which shows as a comma)
Let’s assume Krafty Credit Card requires this combo to get to a human being:
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I’m not sure of your logic. Labour really solidified their solid seats and got lots of votes in no hoper seats like my own where they doubled the votes on 2015 to 6000 and actually helped the Tory get a much bigger majority in what was a LD seat until 2015. Votes in safe seats for Labour or Tory are less valuable in FPTP, and if the Swing in Tory defending seats had been useful votes it would have resulted in more seats.
Even if was true that Labour was wasting votes just by racking up votes in safe Tory seats, it would still contradict your original claim that Labour was only racking up votes in their own safe seats.
But, in any case, you're still not quite right. Labour actually won a few more seats (and the Tories a few less) in 2017 than the uniform swing indicated -- a 2.4% lead "should" have resulted in 323 seats for the Tories and 259 for Labour, based on swings from 2015. And additionally there were bigger-than-average swings in some of the Tory seats which Labour just missed out on gaining. Right now, based on uniform swing from 2017, Labour need "only" a 7% lead in the popular vote to gain a majority, as compared to 2015, when uniform swing indicated they needed a 12% lead.
It was Ed Miliband in 2015 who made the Labour vote very inefficiently distributed and just "stacked up votes in safe Labour seats", whereas Corbyn in 2017 actually reversed the trend a bit and achieved bigger swings "where it matters".
I'm not sure that's right - Con lead 6.6% gave 331 seats, Con lead 2.4% gave 318 seats. That's a big reduction in the lead only leading to 13 fewer seats.
I guess it depends how calculation is done because I suspect the impact of Scotland is very significant - ie Con gaining 12 seats against the UK wide movement.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
The other 75%. They also benefit from money sent home, and people returning with skills and contacts (since some people graduate from picking fruit). This is why nearly all governments want more freedom for their citizens, except in dictatorships like the GDR.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens. Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
Mass exodus from the USA then? But the question is: do we want them?
From the WP link: Conservatives, meanwhile, already have criticized Harris’s tax plan as being prohibitively expensive at a time when annual deficits are approaching $1 trillion.
Erm, that would be the deficit created by the Republican tax cut of more than $2 trillion, but that went to the wealthy, so that's all right. It is true that some on the American right did oppose Trump's promised $10 trillion tax cut but for most US Conservatives, these things only matter when Democrats rule.
No such hypocrisy here, I'm sure, when our figures are published later today!
To be serious, the WP article is worth reading. I'm not yet convinced by Kamala Harris on the basis of a couple of video clips where she seems less presidential than, say, Amy Klobuchar, but it is early days yet and we need to see who will break through from the couple of dozen Democrats throwing their hats into the ring. Donald Trump hardly seemed presidential but blew away a large field of Republicans from central casting.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
At no point will Labour vote for or abstain in favour of May's deal, no matter how she tries to blackmail by running the clock down. If the deal narrow passes by Tory and DUP votes only (still can't see the DUP backing down, and they aren't getting a change to the backstop - pure fantasy) then I think Labour could live with that. The Tories will still face the brunt of a vast amount of disappointment and discord from within their own side, and it wouldnt be too hard to reverse in the future.
ON the other hand, they will have made very clear that there are plenty of other alternatives than No Deal that they would be happy to vote for, so if May was insane enough to drive us off of a cliff, it would be totally on her as well.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
The other 75%. They also benefit from money sent home, and people returning with skills and contacts (since some people graduate from picking fruit). This is why nearly all governments want more freedom for their citizens, except in dictatorships like the GDR.
Exactly. It is ridiculously simplistic to think that 2 million Bulgarians simply upped stick and moved permanently to the UK, never to return. In fact, migration is a much more complex business with people constantly coming and going. Young people in particular may leave to seek their fortunes in foreign lands, often returning to the land of their birth later in life with riches, skills and contacts. I'm sure it has been shown that migration typically benefits both the destination and source countries in the long run.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
There you go, elevating the national entity above human beings.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
Nations are not commodities.
It’s the reduction of everything to an economic unit - creating a simplistic game where one simply endeavours to maximise the equation - that lies behind much of the change in today’s politics.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
There you go, elevating the national entity above human beings.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
That seems a strange thing to say. Surely the whole point of having laws at all is to put the collective good before individual freedom? For example, we don't have the individual freedom to drop litter wherever we like so as to achieve the collective good of a tidy country. Not many people would see that as a bad thing.
Couldn't agree more. May has provided a complete vacuum where leadership was required. Anyone, even Andrea Leadsom, would have been better than this. They could hardly have been worse!
I tried speculating last night if there are any MPs who would be worse in this particular situation. Not that she does not have some qualities better than many, but thinking about how she is so clearly wrong for this situation as she is unwilling to act and is just pursuing options she knows will not work just to delay.
All I came up with were Chris Williamson and Chris Chope as being worse, but there have to be a full handful at least. Suggestions?
Andrew Bridgen, Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Mark Francois, Steve Baker, and the woman who I helped to elect, Andrea Jenkyns, though I think David Herdson deserves the lion's share of the credit for that.
You and David preferred Andrea Jenkyns to Ed Balls? You have never shown signs of being stark raving bonkers before.
I'd be truly mortified if that were me TSE.
Until someone is elected you cannot always tell their quality. It's why we trust to the brand.
Anyone even vaguely interested in politics ought to have been able to tell that Ed Balls is a class act.
People like party labels. They might know he was a class act, but not that his opponent was so bad that he was better than the person wearing the right rosette. We don't have much time to get to know candidates, and most only spout party slogans, it is hard to tell.
As I said the other night, the PB Tories would vote for my cat if she had a blue rosette. She is very photogenic so has media appeal.
I think Conservative voters are less loyal than Labour. Tony Blair understood how to win a majority by targeting close run seats. Labour have the ten safest seats in the commons - not necessarily the best thing
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
Nations are not commodities.
It’s the reduction of everything to an economic unit - creating a simplistic game where one simply endeavours to maximise the equation - that lies behind much of the change in today’s politics.
Nations are just economic actors, no more special than football teams or firms.
I dunno, TMay looks hopelessly incompetent right now but you have to wait to see the outcome.
Imagine parliament "forces" a Remain vs Deal referendum on her. A few months from now we could easily have: * Brexit cancelled * Con leading in polls * TMay still PM * Her enemies marginalized, feuding and discredited
...and people will be asking if she planned the whole thing.
A remainer drug ridden fantasy I'd suggest
Which part don't you buy?
I can imagine Brexit cancelled but the idea there'd still be a functioning Tory party afterwards is shall we say politely a tad unlikely.
If Brexit gets cancelled, then I think Farage's new party will be riding high in the polls.
I'd vote for it.
And me I think - certainly not the tories if they destroy brexit
I'm already out - I can't vote for Wollaston.
I don't think I could, either.
Regardless of where the tent was Wollaston would position herself outside of it so she could piss into it.
At no point will Labour vote for or abstain in favour of May's deal, no matter how she tries to blackmail by running the clock down. If the deal narrow passes by Tory and DUP votes only (still can't see the DUP backing down, and they aren't getting a change to the backstop - pure fantasy) then I think Labour could live with that. The Tories will still face the brunt of a vast amount of disappointment and discord from within their own side, and it wouldnt be too hard to reverse in the future.
ON the other hand, they will have made very clear that there are plenty of other alternatives than No Deal that they would be happy to vote for, so if May was insane enough to drive us off of a cliff, it would be totally on her as well.
Really? Name two of the 'plenty of alternatives.'
If you name more than one, the irony of your accusing anyone else of being a fantasist is mildly amusing.
And it's even better as Labour have said they won't vote for that one alternative either. That being said I can imagine significant numbers of backbenchers breaking ranks to do so if the opportunity were offered.
Your headers are becoming more poetic. Now the bifurcation looks evitable and the country is going to cleave it's appropriate that our language should deconverge.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
There you go, elevating the national entity above human beings.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
And reminding you that those left behind are individuals too. Your dichotomy is false, even if your theology is correct, which I doubt.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
There you go, elevating the national entity above human beings.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
Nations are not commodities.
It’s the reduction of everything to an economic unit - creating a simplistic game where one simply endeavours to maximise the equation - that lies behind much of the change in today’s politics.
Nations are just economic actors, no more special than football teams or firms.
I completely disagree. That’s a classic Anywhere viewpoint. Nations are formed of people who emotionally self-identify with that nation, which is why they exist in the first place and the basis of their stability. They have a legitimate interest in who joins them and at what rate that can at times supersede raw economic considerations of output and input.
The people within them are economic actors, who individually demand goods and services, and thus collectively nations do, but nations are neither “just economic actors” nor the same as football teams or firms, which is ludicrous.
Any time spent thinking about it, or talking to a normal person, will show that up to be nonsense it is.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
There you go, elevating the national entity above human beings.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
I lean more closely to your viewpoint on that, but such trade offs in public policy are made all the time.
If they were not we wouldn’t have any laws or taxation.
I dunno, TMay looks hopelessly incompetent right now but you have to wait to see the outcome.
Imagine parliament "forces" a Remain vs Deal referendum on her. A few months from now we could easily have: * Brexit cancelled * Con leading in polls * TMay still PM * Her enemies marginalized, feuding and discredited
...and people will be asking if she planned the whole thing.
A remainer drug ridden fantasy I'd suggest
Which part don't you buy?
I can imagine Brexit cancelled but the idea there'd still be a functioning Tory party afterwards is shall we say politely a tad unlikely.
If Brexit gets cancelled, then I think Farage's new party will be riding high in the polls.
I'd vote for it.
You might want to wait for what comes out of the Mueller investigation and the NCA's investigation into Arron Banks' donations to the Leave campaign before harnessing your sails to Farage's mast.
That seems a strange thing to say. Surely the whole point of having laws at all is to put the collective good before individual freedom? For example, we don't have the individual freedom to drop litter wherever we like so as to achieve the collective good of a tidy country. Not many people would see that as a bad thing.
Right, but the point is that it's not good for *the collective* per se, it's good for the individuals in the collective.
Putting it another way, say you've got a country called Somewheria, and all the citizens of Somewheria decide they want to move to Elsewheria, and Somewheria ceases to exist. This results in the DESTRUCTION of Somewheria. But nobody is harmed, and everyone is better off, and nobody's rights are violated.
This is something that nationalists would probably disagree with - they care about the abstract organization over the actual humans.
That seems a strange thing to say. Surely the whole point of having laws at all is to put the collective good before individual freedom? For example, we don't have the individual freedom to drop litter wherever we like so as to achieve the collective good of a tidy country. Not many people would see that as a bad thing.
Right, but the point is that it's not good for *the collective* per se, it's good for the individuals in the collective.
Putting it another way, say you've got a country called Somewheria, and all the citizens of Somewheria decide they want to move to Elsewheria, and Somewheria ceases to exist. This results in the DESTRUCTION of Somewheria. But nobody is harmed, and everyone is better off, and nobody's rights are violated.
This is something that nationalists would probably disagree with - they care about the abstract organization over the actual humans.
You’re obviously intelligent but you live in an idealistic bubble totally disconnected from the real world.
That seems a strange thing to say. Surely the whole point of having laws at all is to put the collective good before individual freedom? For example, we don't have the individual freedom to drop litter wherever we like so as to achieve the collective good of a tidy country. Not many people would see that as a bad thing.
Right, but the point is that it's not good for *the collective* per se, it's good for the individuals in the collective.
Putting it another way, say you've got a country called Somewheria, and all the citizens of Somewheria decide they want to move to Elsewheria, and Somewheria ceases to exist. This results in the DESTRUCTION of Somewheria. But nobody is harmed, and everyone is better off, and nobody's rights are violated.
This is something that nationalists would probably disagree with - they care about the abstract organization over the actual humans.
You’re obviously intelligent but you live in an idealistic bubble totally disconnected from the real world.
Amongst all the talk of backstops, no deal minideals, customs unions, Articles 50, gridlock at Dover, blah, we should not lose sight of the central, tragic, wasteful mediocrity of Brexit.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
And do you think it should be the aspiration of Bulgarians to pick our food? Bulgaria has lost 2 million of its citizens since the early 1990s - nearly 25% of its then population. Its rather sad don't you think - that all you think they are good for is to pick strawberries? Who is going to pick their fruit and care for their elderly?
I always find it odd when anyone puts the good of a "country" above the good of people.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
If a hypothetical developing country loses most of its doctors, engineers and entrepreneurs to the West then firstly, it is subsidising the richer countries, and more importantly is less likely to develop if it loses the very citizens most likely to deliver growth. Against that, it benefits both the individuals who leave and the country they end up in. There again, those left behind, who are less well off than they would otherwise have been, are people too.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
That’s a load of rubbish. That’s the sort of thing rich people say to get out of their obligations to others.
That seems a strange thing to say. Surely the whole point of having laws at all is to put the collective good before individual freedom? For example, we don't have the individual freedom to drop litter wherever we like so as to achieve the collective good of a tidy country. Not many people would see that as a bad thing.
Right, but the point is that it's not good for *the collective* per se, it's good for the individuals in the collective.
Putting it another way, say you've got a country called Somewheria, and all the citizens of Somewheria decide they want to move to Elsewheria, and Somewheria ceases to exist. This results in the DESTRUCTION of Somewheria. But nobody is harmed, and everyone is better off, and nobody's rights are violated.
This is something that nationalists would probably disagree with - they care about the abstract organization over the actual humans.
I hope I am in agreement with Edmund. The state is nothing other than the framework which allows people to coexist under a mutually agreed set of rules. The state as an entity should never be considered more important than the individuals that live within it.
The primary difference between a reasonable Libertarian and a reasonable Statist is the degree to which the collective, acting through the state, should impose rules on the individual.
Unless of course you are talking about the very good manga series Hetalia.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEsFtiruIok&list=FLg5SdxeHca5JpoZ1j9-RpJg&index=3
https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1087482717158211584
Hope it is a Hickenlooper/Klobuchar ticket, in whatever order.
One more question if I may - what is the consensus re whether Cooper amendment will pass?
My initial reaction is Yes - if it gets all opposition + some Con remainers.
http://freakonomics.com/podcast/andrew-yang/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-safe-seat-marginal-constituencies-house-of-commons-jeremy-corbyn-theresa-may-a7886571.html
He starts off well, and then it all goes a bit unicorn poop. Of course, he stands no chance at all against the machine politicians.
As a few indicated second thoughts last week, some on here saw the tide turning and, obviously, it didn't, so I'm not getting ahead of myself in thinking this will happen, but fingers crossed.
Well that's depressing.
I suspect at that point, abstainers will start crawling out the Labour wodwork.
It points to the lack of an obvious Dem leader, other than Pelosi, who is Speaker.
My crazy, 'i'm going on a world cruise' bets, are Zuckerberg or Ivanka for POTUS.
"I promise I'll pardon you, Dad, I just have to wait for the right time..."
Although she may be busy running the World Bank if rumours are true.
Imagine on BBC1 interesting about the political playwright James Graham
But it is outstanding. I love it.
I suspect you are Sean_T with a proxy name.
And good to see Thelma (Bob's wife) in action.
All of this is to stop Bulgarians picking our strawberries.
Not to forget that modernisers like Blair and Cameron won elections and changed laws through their modernisation that will likely never be reversed. While traditionalists like IDS and Corbyn have wallowed on the opposition benches.
I'd argue Thatcher was very much a moderniser of her day too. Just of a different style.
Abstain, let May's Deal happen.
Regarding the press 3, press 6 thing. There’s a great life hack for that: use that pause button on your mobile after saving a number (it appears as a comma). It remembers the combo as part of your number so you don’t have to punch it in everytime. Absolute godsend for credit card companies “punch in the 16 digit number followed by the expiry date”. Not any more!
$3 trillion for Medicare For All, sounds like she might have to raise taxes, but no, fuck everything, let's just do a $3 trillion tax cut as well.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/21/sen-kamala-harriss-policy-agenda-trillion-tax-plan-tax-credits-renters-bail-reform-medicare-for-all/?utm_term=.26b7ab82676b
(You have to keep hitting the escape key while the page loads or it'll try to show you a paywall.)
This scenario does presume no deal is indeed obviously bad, and thus the Tories do not retain the support they may well seemingly get because their voters say they are happy with no deal.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/where-did-term-gerrymander-come-180964118/
Also which Politcians deserve to have their own. I think at the moment David Davis would be my favourite for a kind of clueless misreading of a situation - I just happily davis-ed my way around the party and only found out later the hosts had had a fight and split up.
But, in any case, you're still not quite right. Labour actually won a few more seats (and the Tories a few less) in 2017 than the uniform swing indicated -- a 2.4% lead "should" have resulted in 323 seats for the Tories and 259 for Labour, based on swings from 2015. And additionally there were bigger-than-average swings in some of the Tory seats which Labour just missed out on gaining. Right now, based on uniform swing from 2017, Labour need "only" a 7% lead in the popular vote to gain a majority, as compared to 2015, when uniform swing indicated they needed a 12% lead.
It was Ed Miliband in 2015 who made the Labour vote very inefficiently distributed and just "stacked up votes in safe Labour seats", whereas Corbyn in 2017 actually reversed the trend a bit and achieved bigger swings "where it matters".
Usually there is a button on the bottom left of your keypad that allows you to toggle special characters when entering a phone number (# and the like). One of these characters is Pause (which shows as a comma)
Let’s assume Krafty Credit Card requires this combo to get to a human being:
4, 1, [16 digit card number], [date of birth], [expiry date]
The number you need to programme (edit: save into contacts) into your phone is
[phone number], 4, 1, [16 digit card number], [date of birth], [expiry date]
where comma = Pause.
Good luck!
I expect we will see more and more such promises in order to win over the left leaning primary and caucus voters.
Jeremy Corbyn backs MPs' plan to force a second Brexit referendum
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/21/jeremy-corbyn-backs-mps-plan-force-second-brexit-referendum/
I guess it depends how calculation is done because I suspect the impact of Scotland is very significant - ie Con gaining 12 seats against the UK wide movement.
By that logic, Israel should not allowed to let Jews arrive, because it drains other countries of intelligent citizens.
Much better, surely, that nations because subject to the same laws of demand as other commodities. Failing countries that follow stupid policies, should lose all their people.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html
Erm, that would be the deficit created by the Republican tax cut of more than $2 trillion, but that went to the wealthy, so that's all right. It is true that some on the American right did oppose Trump's promised $10 trillion tax cut but for most US Conservatives, these things only matter when Democrats rule.
No such hypocrisy here, I'm sure, when our figures are published later today!
To be serious, the WP article is worth reading. I'm not yet convinced by Kamala Harris on the basis of a couple of video clips where she seems less presidential than, say, Amy Klobuchar, but it is early days yet and we need to see who will break through from the couple of dozen Democrats throwing their hats into the ring. Donald Trump hardly seemed presidential but blew away a large field of Republicans from central casting.
It is all too hard for this bear of little brain but I am suspicious of trite answers on either side. The economic effects are complicated, and the moralising best left to philosophers and theologians, and, well, politicians.
ON the other hand, they will have made very clear that there are plenty of other alternatives than No Deal that they would be happy to vote for, so if May was insane enough to drive us off of a cliff, it would be totally on her as well.
Nothing scares me more than putting the collective good over individual freedom . Almost every evil in this world stems from that root.
It’s the reduction of everything to an economic unit - creating a simplistic game where one simply endeavours to maximise the equation - that lies behind much of the change in today’s politics.
That’s what makes politicalbetting so interesting.
I hope I’m wrong, but I’m not holding my breath.
If you name more than one, the irony of your accusing anyone else of being a fantasist is mildly amusing.
And it's even better as Labour have said they won't vote for that one alternative either. That being said I can imagine significant numbers of backbenchers breaking ranks to do so if the opportunity were offered.
I’ll dig out a fun article on the South Sea bubble for you when I get a moment
The people within them are economic actors, who individually demand goods and services, and thus collectively nations do, but nations are neither “just economic actors” nor the same as football teams or firms, which is ludicrous.
Any time spent thinking about it, or talking to a normal person, will show that up to be nonsense it is.
If they were not we wouldn’t have any laws or taxation.
They rejected his input so he went off on his own
Guilt by association isn’t a thing
Putting it another way, say you've got a country called Somewheria, and all the citizens of Somewheria decide they want to move to Elsewheria, and Somewheria ceases to exist. This results in the DESTRUCTION of Somewheria. But nobody is harmed, and everyone is better off, and nobody's rights are violated.
This is something that nationalists would probably disagree with - they care about the abstract organization over the actual humans.
You should write for The Economist.
The primary difference between a reasonable Libertarian and a reasonable Statist is the degree to which the collective, acting through the state, should impose rules on the individual.
Unless of course you are talking about the very good manga series Hetalia.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2019/01/21/01003-20190121ARTFIG00257-ce-que-prevoit-le-traite-d-aix-la-chapelle.php