In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Not easy to see what the Italians are getting out of this. Are they annoyed by that non event of a treaty between France and Germany which is supposed to set the direction for the EU? At the moment they seem to me to be making themselves look like mavericks who will be given little weight in discussing the next round of EU integration.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
Which is, perhaps, the common factor among those who disdain the Kindle - they just don’t read that many books. I prefer real books, but when travelling, a Kindle is invaluable. Tablets getting lighter will obsolete them in due course, but for now they are much more comfortable to hold for reading.
My travel kit consists of laptop, full size ipad (for movies) and a kindle for when flying and before sleeping.
The kindle is because it's a single purpose device without blue light which keeps me awake. And compared to the other items or a book it doesn't weigh anything.
I find it hard to travel without bringing my knitting. I had three nights in Copenhagen without my knitting last year and the beer wasn't good enough to compensate.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
The EU was way down most people's list of concerns. I hardly gave it a second thought until the referendum. Apart from a few oddballs, nobody was really that bothered one way or the other.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
That's the problem though. Our membership of the European Union isn't subject to another vote every five years, it's forever. What happens if, in five years, after the Euro Army and tax harmonisation, the polls show a clear majority of people regret remaining? Will we have another referendum? I doubt it.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
That's the problem though. Our membership of the European Union isn't subject to another vote every five years, it's forever. What happens if, in five years, after the Euro Army and tax harmonisation, the polls show a clear majority of people regret remaining? Will we have another referendum? I doubt it.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
That's nonsense. If a large number of people wanted to leave the EU there is no way the UK could be held in it against their will.
With such a big field, I wonder if it makes it more likely that Clinton runs again. I think it would be a terrible idea but she remains Democrat Royalty, she has the name recognition etc, and she could argue that she beat Trump in the popular vote by 3 million. She would have to explicitly recognise the failings of her campaign last time and focus much more on blue collar voters etc. Not at all implausible that she at least runs considering how much she wants it. She was 'supposed' to be the first female President, I don't think she will necessarily give up on it that easily.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
What games do you play?
Strategy games of all kinds (I wrote three books about games which sold 100K a couple of decades ago, and have kept up the interest) - typically at the moment Stellaris (space opera, exceptionally good writing and events) and Civ VI; just finished Tyranny. They are immersive and long enough to make a flight to the US seem tiresomely short! I don't care much about physical comfort beyond the basic, so quite happy carrying my laptop and having it on my knees in tourist class for 6 hours or so. .
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
That's the problem though. Our membership of the European Union isn't subject to another vote every five years, it's forever. What happens if, in five years, after the Euro Army and tax harmonisation, the polls show a clear majority of people regret remaining? Will we have another referendum? I doubt it.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
That's nonsense. If a large number of people wanted to leave the EU there is no way the UK could be held in it against their will.
You don't think a second referendum is an attempt to do exactly that?
Remain have run a relentless project fear campaign for the last two and a half years. We have been told planes will drop from the sky and people will drop dead from lack of medication else starve in the streets.
This is maybe, maybe just about enough to get remain over the line in a second referendum, which should indicate how hated the EU is by much of the population. But what happens next? Let's say the second referendum is 54/46 remain.
But in five years time, after EU army and tax harmonisation and five more years of FoM, the polls are showing 58/42 to leave. Will we have a third referendum? I highly doubt it.
I restate: People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
I’m always confused by these thread headers saying things like “Surely the Democrats wont choose candidate X...” as if it is an internal choice for the party like it would be in the UK.
But in reality the candidate will be determined by the results of the primaries, which aren’t really in the control of the party. Sure, they can try to manipulate the outcome a bit (the GOP primary rules are fairly obviously designed to weed out a clear front runner as early as possible) but if a candidate like Trump emerges there isn’t much the party can do to stop them.
A better question is whether Biden will get significant support from voters in IA, NH or SC. If so, he has a strong chance of becoming the nominee, even if the Democratic Party establishment doesn’t think it is in their best interests.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
Not easy to see what the Italians are getting out of this. Are they annoyed by that non event of a treaty between France and Germany which is supposed to set the direction for the EU? At the moment they seem to me to be making themselves look like mavericks who will be given little weight in discussing the next round of EU integration.
I think this spat is going to be a runner
Macron kicked it off last year by telling the Italians he would sort them out if they didnt do what they were told, That was when he was pushing his reforms and riding high in the polls. Now that he;s looking vulnerable the Italians are getting their own back. Normally it's Salvini who fires the bullets, but yesterday Di Maio had a pop at Macron too. What do they get out of it ?
- a firmer stance that means others will think twice before starting a fight - influence as Italy becomes the nucleus of the non Franco german club - telling the French vaffanculo is popular with the voters - payback
With such a big field, I wonder if it makes it more likely that Clinton runs again. I think it would be a terrible idea but she remains Democrat Royalty, she has the name recognition etc, and she could argue that she beat Trump in the popular vote by 3 million. She would have to explicitly recognise the failings of her campaign last time and focus much more on blue collar voters etc. Not at all implausible that she at least runs considering how much she wants it. She was 'supposed' to be the first female President, I don't think she will necessarily give up on it that easily.
If the Democrats want to hand the Electoral College and the rustbelt to Trump on a plate again they can pick Hillary.
I highly doubt she runs again or even if she did that the Democrats would pick her again
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
O/T question for those more up to date than me on rental law. A friend had a 6-month rental agreement which he'd verbally agreed with the landlord to roll on while he decided where to buy. The landlord has now demanded that he buys the place he's in (at the landlord's exorbitant price, to decide immediately without a survey) or he'll put it on the market and require him to leave as soon as a buyer is found.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
With such a big field, I wonder if it makes it more likely that Clinton runs again. I think it would be a terrible idea but she remains Democrat Royalty, she has the name recognition etc, and she could argue that she beat Trump in the popular vote by 3 million. She would have to explicitly recognise the failings of her campaign last time and focus much more on blue collar voters etc. Not at all implausible that she at least runs considering how much she wants it. She was 'supposed' to be the first female President, I don't think she will necessarily give up on it that easily.
If the Democrats want to hand the Electoral College and the rustbelt to Trump on a plate again they can pick Hillary.
I highly doubt she runs again or even if she did that the Democrats would pick her again
Yes, Hilary is a proven loser at both primary and general election level.
May called an election and tried to make it all about Brexit.
She didn’t win, and if you think about it, is only in power because the nationalist community in Northern Ireland has disenfranchised itself.
Brexit has been behind in all polls bar three since the referendum. It is now, on average, nine points behind Remain.
I suspect another election would finish May and Brexit off.
Depends which poll, Yougov for example generally has the Tories still ahead as does Comres and Deltapoll tends to have Leave still ahead while Survation has Leave and Remain neck and neck.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Except that it was quite obvious in many seats that Labour candidates were anti-Brexit. Legally in Britain we elect an individual to represent us.
The Dems are looking like making the mistake the Republicans made last time, and running 15 primary candidates. Until they’ve had their debates and started whittling down the numbers, I’ll be laying the favourite - with one exception, not laying Joe Biden if he goes favourite. If he stands I think he wins, and he’s got a better chance than most against Trump.
I tend to agree. The markets have chosen to anoint Harris favourite, but it’s a year until the actual primaries, and it’s entirely possible her record as AG could be successfully used against her. Biden, on the other hand, is a known quantity, warts and all, so a stop Joe campaign is less likely to get traction. (FWIW, I have money on both at more favourable odds than currently offered.)
Plus Iowa and New Hampshire are still first even if California comes earlier in the process it is those 2 states that will still provide all the momentum.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Except that it was quite obvious in many seats that Labour candidates were anti-Brexit. Legally in Britain we elect an individual to represent us.
Although I voted Lib Dem precisely because it was squarely Remain, I know many who voted Labour as an anti-Brexit vote.
It still amazes me, but it happened, and on a large scale it seems.
O/T question for those more up to date than me on rental law. A friend had a 6-month rental agreement which he'd verbally agreed with the landlord to roll on while he decided where to buy. The landlord has now demanded that he buys the place he's in (at the landlord's exorbitant price, to decide immediately without a survey) or he'll put it on the market and require him to leave as soon as a buyer is found.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
Correct - if there is no contract then the default notice period is 2 rental periods. And as you suggest, a “tentative” notice period is not allowed.
Your friend is actually in a good position to drive a hard bargain with the Landlord. Many solicitors/mortgage lenders will not complete if there is a tenant in situ as the property will not be being sold with vacant possession.
With such a big field, I wonder if it makes it more likely that Clinton runs again. I think it would be a terrible idea but she remains Democrat Royalty, she has the name recognition etc, and she could argue that she beat Trump in the popular vote by 3 million. She would have to explicitly recognise the failings of her campaign last time and focus much more on blue collar voters etc. Not at all implausible that she at least runs considering how much she wants it. She was 'supposed' to be the first female President, I don't think she will necessarily give up on it that easily.
It would be absolutely consistent with her character. There is also a bitter pall of unfinished business over her book about the 2016 campaign. The unknowable factor is her health which doesn't look terrific.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
What games do you play?
Strategy games of all kinds (I wrote three books about games which sold 100K a couple of decades ago, and have kept up the interest) - typically at the moment Stellaris (space opera, exceptionally good writing and events) and Civ VI; just finished Tyranny. They are immersive and long enough to make a flight to the US seem tiresomely short! I don't care much about physical comfort beyond the basic, so quite happy carrying my laptop and having it on my knees in tourist class for 6 hours or so. .
I loved Tyranny. Could have been even better, but for once the 'bad' options felt rational within the world, which was refreshing.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
O/T question for those more up to date than me on rental law. A friend had a 6-month rental agreement which he'd verbally agreed with the landlord to roll on while he decided where to buy. The landlord has now demanded that he buys the place he's in (at the landlord's exorbitant price, to decide immediately without a survey) or he'll put it on the market and require him to leave as soon as a buyer is found.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
If a shorthold tenancy is allowed to roll on (whether agreed or not) it becomes a periodic tenancy with the same terms and conditions as before. And, yes, notice to quit needs to be given formally and in writing.
It's just name recognition fluff at this stage. Good time to lay some early favourites.
Generational change will be the name of the game in 2020 O'Rourke can beat Trump. Not convinced about any of the others, Harris maybe but perhaps too Californian.
Warren or Sanders would lose badly to Trump.
Why? Younger candidates tend to win after 8 years or more if the other party in the White House, FDR, JFK, Carter, Bill Clinton, W Bush, Obama etc when they can really push the 'time for change, fresh face' etc platform.
However the only candidate to beat a President after only one term of his party in the White House since WW2, Reagan in 1980 when he beat President Carter, was 69. 2020 will be the latter not the former
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
That's the problem though. Our membership of the European Union isn't subject to another vote every five years, it's forever. What happens if, in five years, after the Euro Army and tax harmonisation, the polls show a clear majority of people regret remaining? Will we have another referendum? I doubt it.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
That's nonsense. If a large number of people wanted to leave the EU there is no way the UK could be held in it against their will.
You don't think a second referendum is an attempt to do exactly that?
Remain have run a relentless project fear campaign for the last two and a half years. We have been told planes will drop from the sky and people will drop dead from lack of medication else starve in the streets.
This is maybe, maybe just about enough to get remain over the line in a second referendum, which should indicate how hated the EU is by much of the population. But what happens next? Let's say the second referendum is 54/46 remain.
But in five years time, after EU army and tax harmonisation and five more years of FoM, the polls are showing 58/42 to leave. Will we have a third referendum? I highly doubt it.
I restate: People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
It's why the people have changed their minds argument is crap. They might again. I think we need a vote because there's no other way for a decision to be made, as the delay attempts show us parliament wants to avoid making a decision, but there are plenty of good reasons against the idea.
To win the presidency the Dems should hope the primary voters elect a candidate who can overturn Trump’s narrow victories in PA, MI and WI (and hang onto MN). If they do that they will win the presidency even if the GOP are up their usual dirty tricks in Florida and North Carolina.
The only candidate likely to run left enough for Sanders to endorse would be Warren but he polls better than she does so there is no point him dropping out to endorse a weaker candidate
I don't think the evidence is suggesting that Warren is a weaker candidate than Sanders. I know other people are always telling you that you can't read early polling directly as the eternal truth and that won't stop you doing it but they both have quite weak numbers considering their name recognition. Worse, Sanders has *exceptionally* weak numbers for his situation: If you got maybe 40% of the vote last time, and you're polling 15% now against a bunch of competitors the voters haven't heard of yet, you're not on a good trajectory.
Since when is an 11% lead for Sanders v Trump 'exceptionally weak numbers'?
Plus Sanders is still generally second in the polls after Biden, a former VP.
At the end of the day the Democrats should be focused on the rustbelt and nothing but the rustbelt to beat Trump, if they pick another elitist coastal liberal they will likely lose
Specifically on Sanders, I'll be surprised if he doesn't run. What's he got to lose? - if it doesn't go wonderfully, he can endorse someone else then, and in the meantime he'll pull all the candidates leftwards.
Downsides would be:
1) If his performance is embarrassingly flat, as it probably would be, he loses stature; Currently he can act like he speaks for the whole of the left, but if he shows up in Iowa and his vote goes from 49.5% to 15%, he looks like a has-been.
2) Because the field is so crowded, it's the early races where endorsements really matter. If he wants Candidate X to win, it's much better to stump for Candidate X in Iowa and have them come out with a healthy score there, rather than splitting their vote so the left goes from 1st or 2nd to say 4th and 5th, then endorsing them only after he's proved he doesn't matter any more.
The only candidate likely to run left enough for Sanders to endorse would be Warren but he polls better than she does so there is no point him dropping out to endorse a weaker candidate
As a leftie I can't say that any of the other candidates especially inspire me so far - Warren failed to support Sanders last time (retreating into pathetic "don't know" status) and is a bank-bashing populist rather than a leftist.
Edmund's points are interesting, as always, but Sanders doesn't strike me as a calculating man - I think he'll want to have a go. It's quite natural that he's on 15% with a zillion other candidates, vs 40% when he was the only alternative to Hillary.
Exactly with far more candidates he is still on second place
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
Which is, perhaps, the common factor among those who disdain the Kindle - they just don’t read that many books. I prefer real books, but when travelling, a Kindle is invaluable. Tablets getting lighter will obsolete them in due course, but for now they are much more comfortable to hold for reading.
Tablets won't beat out eink for reading as it is way more pleasant to read on a dedicated screen than on a general purpose tablet screen.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
That's the problem though. Our membership of the European Union isn't subject to another vote every five years, it's forever. What happens if, in five years, after the Euro Army and tax harmonisation, the polls show a clear majority of people regret remaining? Will we have another referendum? I doubt it.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
That's nonsense. If a large number of people wanted to leave the EU there is no way the UK could be held in it against their will.
You don't think a second referendum is an attempt to do exactly that?
Remain have run a relentless project fear campaign for the last two and a half years. We have been told planes will drop from the sky and people will drop dead from lack of medication else starve in the streets.
This is maybe, maybe just about enough to get remain over the line in a second referendum, which should indicate how hated the EU is by much of the population. But what happens next? Let's say the second referendum is 54/46 remain.
But in five years time, after EU army and tax harmonisation and five more years of FoM, the polls are showing 58/42 to leave. Will we have a third referendum? I highly doubt it.
I restate: People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
Surely this is no different than the pendulum of public opinion gradually swinging from Labour to Conservative and back again over time. Every 5 years the voters are asked if they’ve changed their minds.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
Which is, perhaps, the common factor among those who disdain the Kindle - they just don’t read that many books. I prefer real books, but when travelling, a Kindle is invaluable. Tablets getting lighter will obsolete them in due course, but for now they are much more comfortable to hold for reading.
My travel kit consists of laptop, full size ipad (for movies) and a kindle for when flying and before sleeping.
The kindle is because it's a single purpose device without blue light which keeps me awake. And compared to the other items or a book it doesn't weigh anything.
I ditched the iPad as a device without purpose, now travel with just a Macbook Pro and a Kindle.
With such a big field, I wonder if it makes it more likely that Clinton runs again. I think it would be a terrible idea but she remains Democrat Royalty, she has the name recognition etc, and she could argue that she beat Trump in the popular vote by 3 million. She would have to explicitly recognise the failings of her campaign last time and focus much more on blue collar voters etc. Not at all implausible that she at least runs considering how much she wants it. She was 'supposed' to be the first female President, I don't think she will necessarily give up on it that easily.
If the Democrats want to hand the Electoral College and the rustbelt to Trump on a plate again they can pick Hillary.
I highly doubt she runs again or even if she did that the Democrats would pick her again
Yes, Hilary is a proven loser at both primary and general election level.
Yes having started as clear favourite in 2008 she lost the primary and then having been overwhelming favourite in 2008 she scraped through the primary and lost the general election.
The Dems are looking like making the mistake the Republicans made last time, and running 15 primary candidates. Until they’ve had their debates and started whittling down the numbers, I’ll be laying the favourite - with one exception, not laying Joe Biden if he goes favourite. If he stands I think he wins, and he’s got a better chance than most against Trump.
I tend to agree. The markets have chosen to anoint Harris favourite, but it’s a year until the actual primaries, and it’s entirely possible her record as AG could be successfully used against her. Biden, on the other hand, is a known quantity, warts and all, so a stop Joe campaign is less likely to get traction. (FWIW, I have money on both at more favourable odds than currently offered.)
Plus Iowa and New Hampshire are still first even if California comes earlier in the process it is those 2 states that will still provide all the momentum.
The contest has started even earlier than usual. I think for most candidates it will be long since over, well before voting actually starts.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Well it worked though.
You are ahead of events. We haven't failed to leave yet.
"People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists."
That's always been true, but the referendum has exposed a worrying self-belief from many so-called liberals. They don't believe that others have a legitimate opinion. They are right, therefore they have a legitimate right to game the system.
It smacks more of the hard-left who have always thought that way. The veneer of democracy is indeed thin. OGH's party as a natural dictators? Who'd a thunk it?
I still hope this dictatorial stance by many liberals is a one-off because the EU is their true precious. But the lack of self-awareness by some is confusing.
The Dems are looking like making the mistake the Republicans made last time, and running 15 primary candidates. Until they’ve had their debates and started whittling down the numbers, I’ll be laying the favourite - with one exception, not laying Joe Biden if he goes favourite. If he stands I think he wins, and he’s got a better chance than most against Trump.
I tend to agree. The markets have chosen to anoint Harris favourite, but it’s a year until the actual primaries, and it’s entirely possible her record as AG could be successfully used against her. Biden, on the other hand, is a known quantity, warts and all, so a stop Joe campaign is less likely to get traction. (FWIW, I have money on both at more favourable odds than currently offered.)
I said when Trump was elected that the best thing the Dems could do would be to run their primaries a year early, effectively choosing a Leader of the Opposition who would then go against Trump having built a high profile. Right now the ‘voice’ of the Democrats is old Nancy who’s definitely not running, she’s fighting for attention with a dozen others who are going to spend the next 18 months contradicting her and each other, airing their dirty laundry in public for Trump and the Republicans to attack. Of course, this strategy would only have worked if they chose a genuinely clean skin, without a lot of baggage that their opponents could spend a year dragging up.
What’s more interesting is how the Dems go about the primary selection, I think they’ve made a mistake in bringing forward California, as the candidates who appeal there are going to be different to those who appeal to the swing states - and they need to pick the latter if they’re going to beat Trump.
Osborne says Brexit is now likely to be delayed as John McDonnell last night confirmed Labour would back Cooper's amendment to suspend Article 50 if no Deal has been approved by mid February
The Dems are looking like making the mistake the Republicans made last time, and running 15 primary candidates. Until they’ve had their debates and started whittling down the numbers, I’ll be laying the favourite - with one exception, not laying Joe Biden if he goes favourite. If he stands I think he wins, and he’s got a better chance than most against Trump.
I tend to agree. The markets have chosen to anoint Harris favourite, but it’s a year until the actual primaries, and it’s entirely possible her record as AG could be successfully used against her. Biden, on the other hand, is a known quantity, warts and all, so a stop Joe campaign is less likely to get traction. (FWIW, I have money on both at more favourable odds than currently offered.)
Plus Iowa and New Hampshire are still first even if California comes earlier in the process it is those 2 states that will still provide all the momentum.
The contest has started even earlier than usual. I think for most candidates it will be long since over, well before voting actually starts.
Money will take out some, Iowa and New Hampshire then always narrow the field significantly
The Dems are looking like making the mistake the Republicans made last time, and running 15 primary candidates. Until they’ve had their debates and started whittling down the numbers, I’ll be laying the favourite - with one exception, not laying Joe Biden if he goes favourite. If he stands I think he wins, and he’s got a better chance than most against Trump.
I tend to agree. The markets have chosen to anoint Harris favourite, but it’s a year until the actual primaries, and it’s entirely possible her record as AG could be successfully used against her. Biden, on the other hand, is a known quantity, warts and all, so a stop Joe campaign is less likely to get traction. (FWIW, I have money on both at more favourable odds than currently offered.)
I said when Trump was elected that the best thing the Dems could do would be to run their primaries a year early, effectively choosing a Leader of the Opposition who would then go against Trump having built a high profile. Right now the ‘voice’ of the Democrats is old Nancy who’s definitely not running, she’s fighting for attention with a dozen others who are going to spend the next 18 months contradicting her and each other, airing their dirty laundry in public for Trump and the Republicans to attack. Of course, this strategy would only have worked if they chose a genuinely clean skin, without a lot of baggage that their opponents could spend a year dragging up.
What’s more interesting is how the Dems go about the primary selection, I think they’ve made a mistake in bringing forward California, as the candidates who appeal there are going to be different to those who appeal to the swing states - and they need to pick the latter if they’re going to beat Trump.
To be fair I don’t think the parties have that much control over the dates of the primaries. They are decided by the state legislatures (though as California is effectively a one-party Dem state I guess they had control over that one)
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Except that it was quite obvious in many seats that Labour candidates were anti-Brexit. Legally in Britain we elect an individual to represent us.
Although I voted Lib Dem precisely because it was squarely Remain, I know many who voted Labour as an anti-Brexit vote.
It still amazes me, but it happened, and on a large scale it seems.
Pretending that the last general election vote was some sort of mass assent to Brexit in any form, as Richard Tyndall seems to do, is utterly ridiculous.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Well it worked though.
You are ahead of events. We haven't failed to leave yet.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Except that it was quite obvious in many seats that Labour candidates were anti-Brexit. Legally in Britain we elect an individual to represent us.
Although I voted Lib Dem precisely because it was squarely Remain, I know many who voted Labour as an anti-Brexit vote.
It still amazes me, but it happened, and on a large scale it seems.
Pretending that the last general election vote was some sort of mass assent to Brexit in any form, as Richard Tyndall seems to do, is utterly ridiculous.
Indeed at least a quarter of Labour voters are still Leavers and a quarter of Tory voters Remainers.
Neither party are yet as uniform on Brexit as the LDs, where 90%+ of their voters are Remainers and want EUref2, or UKIP, where 90%+ of their voters are Leavers and want No Deal
O/T question for those more up to date than me on rental law. A friend had a 6-month rental agreement which he'd verbally agreed with the landlord to roll on while he decided where to buy. The landlord has now demanded that he buys the place he's in (at the landlord's exorbitant price, to decide immediately without a survey) or he'll put it on the market and require him to leave as soon as a buyer is found.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
Hi Nick, the usual on a rolled over tenancy agreement is one month’s notice either side, the time between two rent cheques. The landlord should wait until he has his buyer agreed before handing notice to the tenant. If I were the tenant I wouldn’t entertain buying from the landlord, but maybe I might have a ‘friend’ enquire about the actual price from whoever is handling the sale...
He is meant to be impartial but then his record shows his remain credentials and now he is leaving Sky and joining the BBC he will have even more support from his employers
And of course research has shown that some supporters of a second referendum think it will be between May's Deal and WTO Deal. Any second referendum poll has to be clear about the question which will be asked but some arn't clear.
I absolutely agree with you David.
I have a theory “dots theory” that the first wasn’t clear, leave deliberately stitched up.
Remain part was very clear. But leave has come to mean an encyclopaedia of things. Correct me where I am wrong, hours after leave won Cameron is in Europe asking for a leave as close as possible to remain.
If there is another vote, to be fair to leave voters stitched up last time, the leave option has to be indisputable what it is, a very clear destination. For example
Remain, on current terms Leave to a Free Trade Arrangement (similar to Canada’s FTA with EU)
The irony imo is leavers dying in a ditch to avoid another vote. Newspaper headlines like “no second vote, they are trying to steal your brexit”. But the deed may well have been done with the first vote!
Anyone else coming round to this theory? If you join me you are joining the dots.
The fact leavers have ended up defending no deal scenarios just convinces me even more they have been stitched up. That wasn’t the original argument and what Leave actually means? It was orderly brexit and FTA+.
Where leave have lost control of what they arguing for and defending as opposed to what they should be arguing for and defending, goes back to the trick in that original question.
Almost all of them do. Nothing is stopping Mps from making a decision in time, even if afterwards they need extra time to prepare. Support indicative votes or whatever to force the govs hand. Saying it's too hard can we have more time to think is just a lazy and transparent stepping stone to remain from those without guts.
As someone persuaded that remain may be our best option now I understand the tactics of it, but extenders are insulting to pretend that's not what they are doing.
Even formerly deal supporters, since we have some honourably and on record explaining that once the deal is voted down all bets are off, they will do what they must, merely voting for the deal doesn't mean they are not now seeking to reject brexit, it's a new phase.
If they want brexit focus on options to resolve it, not follow Mays lead and kick the can.
'Liberal when it suits me, democratic only when it it's correct.'
I thought we were in 'interesting' times, but I've had five days away in Scandinavia and not been troubled by news bulletins. Let's be honest, it's become very boring, hasn't it?
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
Which is, perhaps, the common factor among those who disdain the Kindle - they just don’t read that many books. I prefer real books, but when travelling, a Kindle is invaluable. Tablets getting lighter will obsolete them in due course, but for now they are much more comfortable to hold for reading.
My travel kit consists of laptop, full size ipad (for movies) and a kindle for when flying and before sleeping.
The kindle is because it's a single purpose device without blue light which keeps me awake. And compared to the other items or a book it doesn't weigh anything.
I ditched the iPad as a device without purpose, now travel with just a Macbook Pro and a Kindle.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
Except that it was quite obvious in many seats that Labour candidates were anti-Brexit. Legally in Britain we elect an individual to represent us.
Although I voted Lib Dem precisely because it was squarely Remain, I know many who voted Labour as an anti-Brexit vote.
It still amazes me, but it happened, and on a large scale it seems.
Pretending that the last general election vote was some sort of mass assent to Brexit in any form, as Richard Tyndall seems to do, is utterly ridiculous.
There were other issues. But pretending as others do that the party positions were not as they were and that that is not relevant is silly.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
What games do you play?
Strategy games of all kinds (I wrote three books about games which sold 100K a couple of decades ago, and have kept up the interest) - typically at the moment Stellaris (space opera, exceptionally good writing and events) and Civ VI; just finished Tyranny. They are immersive and long enough to make a flight to the US seem tiresomely short! I don't care much about physical comfort beyond the basic, so quite happy carrying my laptop and having it on my knees in tourist class for 6 hours or so. .
Great. We should play games together!
I love Civ VI although I expect you’d thrash me at it.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
That's the problem though. Our membership of the European Union isn't subject to another vote every five years, it's forever. What happens if, in five years, after the Euro Army and tax harmonisation, the polls show a clear majority of people regret remaining? Will we have another referendum? I doubt it.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
That's nonsense. If a large number of people wanted to leave the EU there is no way the UK could be held in it against their will.
You don't think a second referendum is an attempt to do exactly that?
Remain have run a relentless project fear campaign for the last two and a half years. We have been told planes will drop from the sky and people will drop dead from lack of medication else starve in the streets.
This is maybe, maybe just about enough to get remain over the line in a second referendum, which should indicate how hated the EU is by much of the population. But what happens next? Let's say the second referendum is 54/46 remain.
But in five years time, after EU army and tax harmonisation and five more years of FoM, the polls are showing 58/42 to leave. Will we have a third referendum? I highly doubt it.
I restate: People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
I don't know what this person or entity you refer to as "Remain" is. I am just an individual. What I have learnt from observing the Brexit process is that it needs to be implemented by a party that has won an election on a specific programme to leave the EU. If leaving the EU is popular that is very likely to happen. If it turns out we don't care that much it won't.
Almost all of them do. Nothing is stopping Mps from making a decision in time, even if afterwards they need extra time to prepare. Support indicative votes or whatever to force the govs hand. Saying it's too hard can we have more time to think is just a lazy and transparent stepping stone to remain from those without guts. As someone persuaded that remain may be our best option now I understand the tactics of it, but extenders are insulting to pretend that's not what they are doing.
++
Nicky Campbell was talking to Justine Greening a couple of days ago about the People's Vote and he called it "Trojan horse Remain", she didn't like that, but he's not wrong. Greening seemed quite discomforted by many of the reasonable points Campbell made. It would be nice if our politicians were a bit more staight talking and said that what they are really trying to do is stop Brexit altogether. I'd also like to hear what they plan to do in the event of the "wrong" answer being given a second time.
Mrs May really cannot be this incompetent, surely?
The Tories currently don’t even have an opinion polling firm under contract – seen as all-important to fight any election – with a tender currently out to hire a new one.
Had the Tory Brexiteers voted for May's deal, it would still have lost. Admittedly they might be on stronger ground when criticizing Tory Remainers, but I'm not sure it would have made much difference.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
Which is, perhaps, the common factor among those who disdain the Kindle - they just don’t read that many books. I prefer real books, but when travelling, a Kindle is invaluable. Tablets getting lighter will obsolete them in due course, but for now they are much more comfortable to hold for reading.
My travel kit consists of laptop, full size ipad (for movies) and a kindle for when flying and before sleeping.
The kindle is because it's a single purpose device without blue light which keeps me awake. And compared to the other items or a book it doesn't weigh anything.
I ditched the iPad as a device without purpose, now travel with just a Macbook Pro and a Kindle.
The tablet form factor seems redundant to me now.
I've also given up on the tablet.
That’s interesting. With the latest iPad I’ve all but ditched the laptop now, only using it for writing long and complicated tender documents. I’ve set the iPad up so I can connect to my own and customer servers if required, and can pretty much spend the day in the pub or at the cricket and do anything that might be expected of me.
Books: I read hard-copy books. I mostly buy them from charity shops. Once I've read them, usually I don't want to keep them. I donate them back to charity, pass on to friends or leave behind on public transport as a gift to the next passenger or a member of staff.
The Dems are looking like making the mistake the Republicans made last time, and running 15 primary candidates. Until they’ve had their debates and started whittling down the numbers, I’ll be laying the favourite - with one exception, not laying Joe Biden if he goes favourite. If he stands I think he wins, and he’s got a better chance than most against Trump.
I tend to agree. The markets have chosen to anoint Harris favourite, but it’s a year until the actual primaries, and it’s entirely possible her record as AG could be successfully used against her. Biden, on the other hand, is a known quantity, warts and all, so a stop Joe campaign is less likely to get traction. (FWIW, I have money on both at more favourable odds than currently offered.)
I said when Trump was elected that the best thing the Dems could do would be to run their primaries a year early, effectively choosing a Leader of the Opposition who would then go against Trump having built a high profile. Right now the ‘voice’ of the Democrats is old Nancy who’s definitely not running, she’s fighting for attention with a dozen others who are going to spend the next 18 months contradicting her and each other, airing their dirty laundry in public for Trump and the Republicans to attack. Of course, this strategy would only have worked if they chose a genuinely clean skin, without a lot of baggage that their opponents could spend a year dragging up.
What’s more interesting is how the Dems go about the primary selection, I think they’ve made a mistake in bringing forward California, as the candidates who appeal there are going to be different to those who appeal to the swing states - and they need to pick the latter if they’re going to beat Trump.
With the exception of the faintly ridiculous Tulsi Gabbard (who, if you've got the cash, is an obvious trading short), I don't think the Democrats are particularly divided - Pelosi is on reasonable terms even with AOC. As the recent congressional votes on the shutdown showed, it is the Republicans who could be the more divided.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
The only candidate likely to run left enough for Sanders to endorse would be Warren but he polls better than she does so there is no point him dropping out to endorse a weaker candidate
I don't think the evidence is suggesting that Warren is a weaker candidate than Sanders. I know other people are always telling you that you can't read early polling directly as the eternal truth and that won't stop you doing it but they both have quite weak numbers considering their name recognition. Worse, Sanders has *exceptionally* weak numbers for his situation: If you got maybe 40% of the vote last time, and you're polling 15% now against a bunch of competitors the voters haven't heard of yet, you're not on a good trajectory.
Since when is an 11% lead for Sanders v Trump 'exceptionally weak numbers'?
Plus Sanders is still generally second in the polls after Biden, a former VP.
At the end of the day the Democrats should be focused on the rustbelt and nothing but the rustbelt to beat Trump, if they pick another elitist coastal liberal they will likely lose
He's strong against Trump (on current polling, it wouldn't last through a campaign), but that's not the question, it's how he does against Dems. He comes second but that's mostly name recognition, and what's weak is that all his *previous* supporters should recognize him since they voted for him before, but he's already losing most of the people who voted for him in 2016 - and that's before most of the potential competitors have even announced, let alone campaigned.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
Which is, perhaps, the common factor among those who disdain the Kindle - they just don’t read that many books. I prefer real books, but when travelling, a Kindle is invaluable. Tablets getting lighter will obsolete them in due course, but for now they are much more comfortable to hold for reading.
My travel kit consists of laptop, full size ipad (for movies) and a kindle for when flying and before sleeping.
The kindle is because it's a single purpose device without blue light which keeps me awake. And compared to the other items or a book it doesn't weigh anything.
I ditched the iPad as a device without purpose, now travel with just a Macbook Pro and a Kindle.
The tablet form factor seems redundant to me now.
I've also given up on the tablet.
That’s interesting. With the latest iPad I’ve all but ditched the laptop now, only using it for writing long and complicated tender documents. I’ve set the iPad up so I can connect to my own and customer servers if required, and can pretty much spend the day in the pub or at the cricket and do anything that might be expected of me.
I got a Dell laptop - nothing special, but very light and with excellent battery life.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
What games do you play?
Strategy games of all kinds (I wrote three books about games which sold 100K a couple of decades ago, and have kept up the interest) - typically at the moment Stellaris (space opera, exceptionally good writing and events) and Civ VI; just finished Tyranny. They are immersive and long enough to make a flight to the US seem tiresomely short! I don't care much about physical comfort beyond the basic, so quite happy carrying my laptop and having it on my knees in tourist class for 6 hours or so. .
Great. We should play games together!
I love Civ VI although I expect you’d thrash me at it.
Civ VI - play as Gilgamesh on the longest possible timeframes and largest possible map on Pangaea- build War Wagons from the start and trash everything and everyone! Even on level 8, it gives you intial cash and power that you can use to great effect.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
The EU was way down most people's list of concerns. I hardly gave it a second thought until the referendum. Apart from a few oddballs, nobody was really that bothered one way or the other.
What a bloody sensible comment. Nothing more needs to be added.
It was just the trots who feared the EU as military-industrial oppressive capitalist running dog on the one hand, and the mad anti-foreigner, things have never been the same since Waterloo, cross of st. george flying proud on my flagpole dolts who cared.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
It was a warning sign that Cameron’s promise of a referendum didn’t assuage the extremists but merely legitimised them.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
The EU was way down most people's list of concerns. I hardly gave it a second thought until the referendum. Apart from a few oddballs, nobody was really that bothered one way or the other.
What a bloody sensible comment. Nothing more needs to be added.
It was just the trots who feared the EU as military-industrial oppressive capitalist running dog on the one hand, and the mad anti-foreigner, things have never been the same since Waterloo, cross of st. george flying proud on my flagpole dolts who cared.
Had the Tory Brexiteers voted for May's deal, it would still have lost. Admittedly they might be on stronger ground when criticizing Tory Remainers, but I'm not sure it would have made much difference.
By trashing their own government's work so publicly and then voting against it in such large numbers, Tory MPs have dented the credibility of the deal (and indeed of leaving more generally), and the ensuing chaos and speculation about alternatives has significantly reduced the prospect of any Brexit. In particular the rising risk of no deal has galvanized other MPs into co-operating across party lines to try and find ways to stop it happening.
Things would look very different had the deal been argued for and backed by the Tories and DUP, and only then failed by a whisker due to the votes of a handful of Tory remainers - and indeed the latter may not have been emboldened to do so in such circumstances. Certainly it would be they, rather than the government, that would be under intense pressure not to risk no deal, and it is unlikely that Labour would unite behind anything that stopped the deal eventually going through - what unites the opponents currently is stopping no deal, not (yet) stopping Brexit.
The dogmatism of the ultra leavers really has put their whole project on the line.
O/T question for those more up to date than me on rental law. A friend had a 6-month rental agreement which he'd verbally agreed with the landlord to roll on while he decided where to buy. The landlord has now demanded that he buys the place he's in (at the landlord's exorbitant price, to decide immediately without a survey) or he'll put it on the market and require him to leave as soon as a buyer is found.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
Correct - if there is no contract then the default notice period is 2 rental periods. And as you suggest, a “tentative” notice period is not allowed.
Your friend is actually in a good position to drive a hard bargain with the Landlord. Many solicitors/mortgage lenders will not complete if there is a tenant in situ as the property will not be being sold with vacant possession.
Many thanks, I'll tell him, though Sandpit suggests the period is only 1 month? My friend's AST for 6 months didn't have anything about early notice (unless the tenant failed to pay rent or breached the usual rules on proper tenancy). The landlord claims he'll put it on the market for £10K more than he's asking for.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
It was a warning sign that Cameron’s promise of a referendum didn’t assuage the extremists but merely legitimised them.
What should he have done to those opposed to the EU ? Had them imprisoned or shot ?
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
It was a warning sign that Cameron’s promise of a referendum didn’t assuage the extremists but merely legitimised them.
It was a warning sign that he was an idiot to allow the Libdems to silence him on the EU - when together, Cameron and Clegg would have won a referendum in 2011 and put the issue to bed for good.
Had the Tory Brexiteers voted for May's deal, it would still have lost. Admittedly they might be on stronger ground when criticizing Tory Remainers, but I'm not sure it would have made much difference.
The, ahem, backstop for Lab revolting was always that if May couldn't convince her own party that the Deal was in the "national interest" how on earth could she expect the Opposition to agree with and support her.
If the ERG had supported her the case for Lab supporting her also would have been much stronger (I'm not talking 100+ but perhaps a dozen).
Of course the DUP might have voted down the government thereafter but that would have been a known unknown and we were supposed to be talking about the national interest here.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
It was a warning sign that Cameron’s promise of a referendum didn’t assuage the extremists but merely legitimised them.
It was a warning sign that he was an idiot to allow the Libdems to silence him on the EU - when together, Cameron and Clegg would have won a referendum in 2011 and put the issue to bed for good.
Plenty of other countries had EU referendums on various treaties but the PMs of the Uk knew better than the people..
O/T question for those more up to date than me on rental law. A friend had a 6-month rental agreement which he'd verbally agreed with the landlord to roll on while he decided where to buy. The landlord has now demanded that he buys the place he's in (at the landlord's exorbitant price, to decide immediately without a survey) or he'll put it on the market and require him to leave as soon as a buyer is found.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
Correct - if there is no contract then the default notice period is 2 rental periods. And as you suggest, a “tentative” notice period is not allowed.
Your friend is actually in a good position to drive a hard bargain with the Landlord. Many solicitors/mortgage lenders will not complete if there is a tenant in situ as the property will not be being sold with vacant possession.
Many thanks, I'll tell him, though Sandpit suggests the period is only 1 month? My friend's AST for 6 months didn't have anything about early notice (unless the tenant failed to pay rent or breached the usual rules on proper tenancy). The landlord claims he'll put it on the market for £10K more than he's asking for.
If it's an AST, it's two months' written notice to expire not before the sixth month of the term for your landlord to kick you out.
It's one month's notice (to expire at the end of a rent payment period) if you wish to terminate.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
It was a warning sign that Cameron’s promise of a referendum didn’t assuage the extremists but merely legitimised them.
What should he have done to those opposed to the EU ? Had them imprisoned or shot ?
He should have taken on their arguments with a bit more respect and seriousness instead of simultaneously insulting them and giving them what they wanted.
In 2017 over 80% of voters chose candidates standing for parties who supported Brexit. Faisal Islam is just plain wrong - not surprising given how biased he is. Easily the worst political correspondent on our TVs.
I voted Labour for the first time in many years specifically because it was possible it would derail Brexit. In my leafy south eastern constituency Labour came a good second for the first time since the sixties. I think a lot of remainers were thinking the same way as me. How else do you explain Labour winning in Canterbury?
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Staying in the EU probably didn't in the many years of the elite club but then we waited years for a leave say on it.
Why don’t you show us the polls that back you up? Don’t think you can.
UKIP winning the EU elections for one smart arse was a warning sign.
It was a warning sign that Cameron’s promise of a referendum didn’t assuage the extremists but merely legitimised them.
You clearly don’t fly or travel. The kindle comes into its own then.
Not convinced. I use my laptop on flights, with a lot more flexibility (complex games, for instance), and if I get bored with that I'll read a book.
What games do you play?
Party games...
Hunt the Kindle ?
It'll never gain momentum...
Have a good morning. Yesterday it took me 25 minutes to travel 1.7 miles. I'm hoping for at least a modest improvement today!
Someone who travelled into work an hour later than I did took two hours for the ten miles I managed in 15 minutes. Good luck.
Looking out from my Home Office , commute time 15 seconds, it is blue sky , sunshine and all covered in white frost, stunningly beautiful. Commiserations to all you commuters.
Comments
Brexit no longer has majority support.
Good luck.
People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
She didn’t win, and if you think about it, is only in power because the nationalist community in Northern Ireland has disenfranchised itself.
Brexit has been behind in all polls bar three since the referendum. It is now, on average, nine points behind Remain.
I suspect another election would finish May and Brexit off.
I'd be content with Biden, but prefer Harris. As we saw the other day, the potential for puns is immense.
Remain have run a relentless project fear campaign for the last two and a half years. We have been told planes will drop from the sky and people will drop dead from lack of medication else starve in the streets.
This is maybe, maybe just about enough to get remain over the line in a second referendum, which should indicate how hated the EU is by much of the population. But what happens next? Let's say the second referendum is 54/46 remain.
But in five years time, after EU army and tax harmonisation and five more years of FoM, the polls are showing 58/42 to leave. Will we have a third referendum? I highly doubt it.
I restate: People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists.
But in reality the candidate will be determined by the results of the primaries, which aren’t really in the control of the party. Sure, they can try to manipulate the outcome a bit (the GOP primary rules are fairly obviously designed to weed out a clear front runner as early as possible) but if a candidate like Trump emerges there isn’t much the party can do to stop them.
A better question is whether Biden will get significant support from voters in IA, NH or SC. If so, he has a strong chance of becoming the nominee, even if the Democratic Party establishment doesn’t think it is in their best interests.
Macron kicked it off last year by telling the Italians he would sort them out if they didnt do what they were told, That was when he was pushing his reforms and riding high in the polls. Now that he;s looking vulnerable the Italians are getting their own back. Normally it's Salvini who fires the bullets, but yesterday Di Maio had a pop at Macron too. What do they get out of it ?
- a firmer stance that means others will think twice before starting a fight
- influence as Italy becomes the nucleus of the non Franco german club
- telling the French vaffanculo is popular with the voters
- payback
I highly doubt she runs again or even if she did that the Democrats would pick her again
Voting Labour because it may do the opposite of its election manifesto reveals a good deal about what is wrong with the political process.
I believe that despite the absence of a current rental agreement, the landlord must give him two months' notice - is that still true? Also, the landlord surely can't give him a sort of tentative notice requiring him to leave at once when a buyer is found - doesn't he need to either wait till the buyer appears and then give 2 months' notice, or give 2 months now and risk that he doesn't get a buyer in 2 months' time?
It still amazes me, but it happened, and on a large scale it seems.
Your friend is actually in a good position to drive a hard bargain with the Landlord. Many solicitors/mortgage lenders will not complete if there is a tenant in situ as the property will not be being sold with vacant possession.
However the only candidate to beat a President after only one term of his party in the White House since WW2, Reagan in 1980 when he beat President Carter, was 69. 2020 will be the latter not the former
Plus Sanders is still generally second in the polls after Biden, a former VP.
At the end of the day the Democrats should be focused on the rustbelt and nothing but the rustbelt to beat Trump, if they pick another elitist coastal liberal they will likely lose
Time for a nice cup of tea Mr M.
The tablet form factor seems redundant to me now.
Her time has come and gone
I think for most candidates it will be long since over, well before voting actually starts.
"People are only allowed to change their minds when it benefits the integrationists."
That's always been true, but the referendum has exposed a worrying self-belief from many so-called liberals. They don't believe that others have a legitimate opinion. They are right, therefore they have a legitimate right to game the system.
It smacks more of the hard-left who have always thought that way. The veneer of democracy is indeed thin. OGH's party as a natural dictators? Who'd a thunk it?
I still hope this dictatorial stance by many liberals is a one-off because the EU is their true precious. But the lack of self-awareness by some is confusing.
What’s more interesting is how the Dems go about the primary selection, I think they’ve made a mistake in bringing forward California, as the candidates who appeal there are going to be different to those who appeal to the swing states - and they need to pick the latter if they’re going to beat Trump.
Julius Caesar enjoyed his bloody pogrom in Gaul.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46968035
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/22/brexit-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn
Pretending that the last general election vote was some sort of mass assent to Brexit in any form, as Richard Tyndall seems to do, is utterly ridiculous.
Neither party are yet as uniform on Brexit as the LDs, where 90%+ of their voters are Remainers and want EUref2, or UKIP, where 90%+ of their voters are Leavers and want No Deal
Where leave have lost control of what they arguing for and defending as opposed to what they should be arguing for and defending, goes back to the trick in that original question.
Come on, join the dots
As someone persuaded that remain may be our best option now I understand the tactics of it, but extenders are insulting to pretend that's not what they are doing.
Even formerly deal supporters, since we have some honourably and on record explaining that once the deal is voted down all bets are off, they will do what they must, merely voting for the deal doesn't mean they are not now seeking to reject brexit, it's a new phase.
If they want brexit focus on options to resolve it, not follow Mays lead and kick the can.
'Liberal when it suits me, democratic only when it it's correct.'
I thought we were in 'interesting' times, but I've had five days away in Scandinavia and not been troubled by news bulletins. Let's be honest, it's become very boring, hasn't it?
I love Civ VI although I expect you’d thrash me at it.
Nicky Campbell was talking to Justine Greening a couple of days ago about the People's Vote and he called it "Trojan horse Remain", she didn't like that, but he's not wrong. Greening seemed quite discomforted by many of the reasonable points Campbell made. It would be nice if our politicians were a bit more staight talking and said that what they are really trying to do is stop Brexit altogether. I'd also like to hear what they plan to do in the event of the "wrong" answer being given a second time.
The Tories currently don’t even have an opinion polling firm under contract – seen as all-important to fight any election – with a tender currently out to hire a new one.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8257029/tories-lose-snap-general-election-unblock-brexit/
https://twitter.com/jonnelledge/status/1087988579157053442?s=21
Not sure how/why you managed that, to be honest.
Mr. Rentool, a good effort, but there's not much more to be had.
Mr. Royale, wish Civ released a proper game for consoles. How Civ VI can go to Switch but not the PS4/Xbox One is beyond me.
Can't do that with a Kindle.
No second referendum is down to 1.33. Quite glad I backed it at 1.75.
Leaving with no deal is back out to 4 (was 3.5 yesterday).
[That's all Ladbrokes, incidentally].
Also, as we're on videogames, a cheap copy of Shadow of Mordor (PS4).
It was just the trots who feared the EU as military-industrial oppressive capitalist running dog on the one hand, and the mad anti-foreigner, things have never been the same since Waterloo, cross of st. george flying proud on my flagpole dolts who cared.
Things would look very different had the deal been argued for and backed by the Tories and DUP, and only then failed by a whisker due to the votes of a handful of Tory remainers - and indeed the latter may not have been emboldened to do so in such circumstances. Certainly it would be they, rather than the government, that would be under intense pressure not to risk no deal, and it is unlikely that Labour would unite behind anything that stopped the deal eventually going through - what unites the opponents currently is stopping no deal, not (yet) stopping Brexit.
The dogmatism of the ultra leavers really has put their whole project on the line.
If the ERG had supported her the case for Lab supporting her also would have been much stronger (I'm not talking 100+ but perhaps a dozen).
Of course the DUP might have voted down the government thereafter but that would have been a known unknown and we were supposed to be talking about the national interest here.
It's one month's notice (to expire at the end of a rent payment period) if you wish to terminate.