I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Do you think millions of voters knew or cared that this was the case? There were many reasons for the vote, but I doubt 'it is hard to change an EU law or directive' was high for the vast majority of people.
I no longer follow American politics closely enough to either comment, or care. Indeed I wonder at our obsession with the White House. It was understandable when America ruled the world and was 50% of global GDP. Now it is around 20% and will fall further over time. It is one power amongst several. China is already more important to most people in the world, in terms of trade
Relatedly, I had an intriguing Brexit debate with some liberal Americans and Canadians in Vietnam last week. They were quite urgently questioning me on Brexit - why are you doing it, why is it such a disaster, what has possessed you, &c
Then I explained to them the basic rudiments of how the EU works: it is run by unelected commissioners, who cannot be thrown out by voters, the parliament only approves laws, does not propose, the Supreme Court works in a foreign language and sits in a foreign country, there is no obvious way to get EU laws repealed, etc etc etc
They were utterly confounded. I turned them into eurosceptics in about 2 minutes. The common response was: why the fuck would you ever tolerate that?
I relay this not to extol my eloquence, but as an example of how intelligent foreigners - even foreigners who speak the same language - can be incredibly ignorant of another country’s politics. I think this issue has bedeviled Brexit from the start. After 50 years we still don’t quite *get* the EU, and they don’t quite *get* us. Hence, Brexit.
De Gaulle was right. A wise Frenchman.
Exactly. My uncle in Australia (lived there since the 1960s) asked me the same question in May 2016, I emailed him my reasoning.
He subsequently apologised for even asking, said he completely understood, and wasn’t clear why Australians had heard so little about it.
Fair enough. When are they going to start building those border posts?
The way round the Backstop and hard border is for the EU to admit that their No Deal fallback position is to allow free movement of goods and services across the border between Iraland and NI but to require Irish exports to pass through custom checks at other EU borders such a Calais, Rotterdam to ensure no Britsih goods are coming in via NI and Ireland.
Such a fallback position does not require a customs union between the UK and the EU or a border in the North Sea. Instead there is a border between Ireland and the EU.
I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Name an "EU law" you think should be repealled
It says a lot that the US declaration of independence - a document which has stood for over 240 years - was less than 1400 words long and would fit on less than 4 A4 pages.
Our withdrawal agreement from the EU by contrast runs to nearly 600 pages - and that doesn't even set the detail for our future relationship!
If only it was as easy to leave the EU in legal terms as to create the United States of America!
I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Do you think millions of voters knew or cared that this was the case? There were many reasons for the vote, but I doubt 'it is hard to change an EU law or directive' was high for the vast majority of people.
Junker will also have noted the Commons voted by just 307 votes to 301 against a permanent Customs Union last July, so it only takes 4 MPs to swap sides and Commons will vote for a more BINO Brexit than May's Deal the EU can work with, in what would be a damaging blow to the ERG but possibly acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
Pelosi is a brilliantly effective Speaker and legislator for the Democrats much as Gingrich was for the Republicans when he also took the House in 1994.
However Bill Clinton came back by shifting to the centre and making compromises with Congress if necessary e.g. on welfare reform and pitching himself against them when required too.
By ending the Government shutdown and not dying in a ditch over wall funding Trump could also be shifting to the centre post midterms with an eye on re election, gambling his base is already locked up
He's been forced to back down humiliatingly from a dispute he never needed to have. That cannot possibly be some kind of smart pivoting.
He's already been hammered by moderates who think he shouldn't have picked the fight; now he's getting it from conservatives who think he's weak for backing down.
And remember, he didn't need to have this fight and give Pelosi an early win - there was a deal on the table in December, when Congress was fully in GOP control.
HYUFD has been predicting Trump pivoting to the centre since the middle of the GOP primaries.
I said it would happen if the Democrats took Congress and it has now started
You said it would happen after he won the GOP primary and it didn't.
Fair enough. When are they going to start building those border posts?
The way round the Backstop and hard border is for the EU to admit that their No Deal fallback position is to allow free movement of goods and services across the border between Iraland and NI but to require Irish exports to pass through custom checks at other EU borders such a Calais, Rotterdam to ensure no Britsih goods are coming in via NI and Ireland.
Such a fallback position does not require a customs union between the UK and the EU or a border in the North Sea. Instead there is a border between Ireland and the EU.
You mean they abandon their solidarity with Ireland, a member state, and break up the SM?
I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Do you think millions of voters knew or cared that this was the case? There were many reasons for the vote, but I doubt 'it is hard to change an EU law or directive' was high for the vast majority of people.
The stupidity burns
Eh?
I’m saying you are a very stupid person. Is that clear? Good.
Mr. HYUFD, I wonder how much Western firms are regretting jumping over there, what with IP going walkies.
No expert on China, but I'd guess that Xi is likely in a very strong domestic position in the short term. But growth is done (always happens with a rapidly expanding economy) and that could lead to political pressure. And, in the past, a way of distracting from that can be to wave the flag and go invade somewhere.
China's notably been reticent to have military adventures. I think Tibet in the 1950s was the last such conquest (had to check, they were involved in the Korean War but didn't conquer the peninsula, obviously, and absorb it into China).
An alternative could be more land-grabbing.
Yes and Hong Kong too is facing a crackdown on the pro democracy opposition, the Communist Party still wants capitalism on its own terms.
China is unlikely to expand military adventures much beyond its borders but Taiwan is the likeliest flashpoint. Russia is still far more willing to challenge the West with military expeditions to the Middle East etc than China is
I recall them invading Vietnam with minimal success.
My recent trip to Vietnam was remarkably illuminating. The highlight, politically, was my guide in Saigon. He was a handsome dude in his forties, recently married to his 3rd wife, and with 4 sons. He was keen to talk sex, and politics. I discovered his Dad was once the media minister for the Vietnamese government in Hanoi, and was something of a hero of the War against America islands all down the Vietnamese coast.
The ironic peak was reached when he told me Vietnam needed and wanted a deep friendship with Trump’s America, to balance Chinese power. He was serious, and he was smart. It was fascinating.
China seems to have a knack for pissing off its neighbours. It’s a soft power minnow.
You clearly missed the bit where I mentioned how China has enthralled Cambodia and Laos. The whole point of my anecdote, you dolt, was that China is turning out to be very good at soft power. It hasn’t sent a single soldier to war, yet much of Asia is now in orbit around the Middle Kingdom. America bombs its way through the Middle East and ends up with fuck all to show for it.
Remainers are so fucking dumb.
Are we really to be treated to one of your pissed diatribes? Oh goody. Nobody does the semi-fascist libertine act better than SeanT.
No, the point is he's failed to do it. I'll say it again - his USP was "canny, unconventional business tycoon who gets things done", not "fat bloke who broadly supports things you like but will fold embarrassingly when confronted with an elderly lady from California".
Yes, his big plus points to his base IMO are:
1. Saying Non PC (aka primitive and vulgar) things which echo their own baser sentiments. 2. Being a hard ass Businessman Who Gets Things Done. A wheeler dealer. A doer.
Where (1) means "He's just like one of us" and (2) adds on "But he's also a proven billionaire boss-man and so we look up to him and trust him to deliver on stuff".
It was Trump's killer achievement to successfully present this duality in 2016 and I don't think he wins again if he loses either aspect. I think he needs both, which is a challenge for him.
Of course (1) is quite easy to maintain or even burnish - just keep up the trash talk - but (2) not so much.
And if he loses that, what then does he become? A rich superannuated bigot with a dirty mouth. That gets you places, of course it does, but it will not get you a 2nd term in the White House.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
Yes and Hong Kong too is facing a crackdown on the pro democracy opposition, the Communist Party still wants capitalism on its own terms.
China is unlikely to expand military adventures much beyond its borders but Taiwan is the likeliest flashpoint. Russia is still far more willing to challenge the West with military expeditions to the Middle East etc than China is
I recall them invading Vietnam with minimal success.
My recent trip to Vietnam was remarkably illuminating. The highlight, politically, was my guide in Saigon. He was a handsome dude in his forties, recently married to his 3rd wife, and with 4 sons. He was keen to talk sex, and politics. I discovered his Dad was once the media minister for the Vietnamese government in Hanoi, and was something of a hero of the War against America
Yet this guy railed against the commie government, said it was totally corrupt. He showed me apartments in central Saigon costing 1-3 million dollars. All owned or sold by communist party officials. He also explained how much Vietnam feared and loathed China, and felt increasingly encircled by it, as China has made Laos and Cambodia total satellites and puppet governments, and at the same time has built bases on islands all down the Vietnamese coast.
The ironic peak was reached when he told me Vietnam needed and wanted a deep friendship with Trump’s America, to balance Chinese power. He was serious, and he was smart. It was fascinating.
Interesting. I would have thought that their more natural ally was Japan.
Yes, I asked him exactly that. He laughed the idea away. I think Japan is still quietly loathed throughout the region, because of the Second World War (understandably, when you look at what Japan did). Also it is perceived as a declining nation, with no power to project. America still seems puissant.
If I was going to pick one country that is going to make non human warfare work on the battle field it would be Japan. They are already using robots more imaginatively than anyone else
Pelosi is a brilliantly effective Speaker and legislator for the Democrats much as Gingrich was for the Republicans when he also took the House in 1994.
However Bill Clinton came back by shifting to the centre and making compromises with Congress if necessary e.g. on welfare reform and pitching himself against them when required too.
By ending the Government shutdown and not dying in a ditch over wall funding Trump could also be shifting to the centre post midterms with an eye on re election, gambling his base is already locked up
He's been forced to back down humiliatingly from a dispute he never needed to have. That cannot possibly be some kind of smart pivoting.
He's already been hammered by moderates who think he shouldn't have picked the fight; now he's getting it from conservatives who think he's weak for backing down.
And remember, he didn't need to have this fight and give Pelosi an early win - there was a deal on the table in December, when Congress was fully in GOP control.
HYUFD has been predicting Trump pivoting to the centre since the middle of the GOP primaries.
I said it would happen if the Democrats took Congress and it has now started
You said it would happen after he won the GOP primary and it didn't.
To some extent he did run a more centrist general election campaign on things like healthcare thsn he did in the primaries but no since he was elected I have been clear he would move more to the centre if the Democrats won Congress and I have been proved correct
OT Bugger - as TSE predicted looks like England will make it to the 5th day to lose and thus provide another great chance for the remarkably strong positive correlation with spurs losing on the same day too...
I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Do you think millions of voters knew or cared that this was the case? There were many reasons for the vote, but I doubt 'it is hard to change an EU law or directive' was high for the vast majority of people.
I think it was.
We get 15% of the vote on things like the red tape fest that is GDPR, and can’t repeal it by electing people to Westminster, or firing them.
It is a huge problem.
I’m still sore Bombay Duck was effectively banned by the EU. That’s another one we can put on the list of things to repeal...
No, the point is he's failed to do it. I'll say it again - his USP was "canny, unconventional business tycoon who gets things done", not "fat bloke who broadly supports things you like but will fold embarrassingly when confronted with an elderly lady from California".
Yes, his big plus points to his base IMO are:
1. Saying Non PC (aka primitive and vulgar) things which echo their own baser sentiments. 2. Being a hard ass Businessman Who Gets Things Done. A wheeler dealer. A doer.
Where (1) means "He's just like one of us" and (2) adds on "But he's also a proven billionaire boss-man and so we look up to him and trust him to deliver on stuff".
It was Trump's killer achievement to successfully present this duality in 2016 and I don't think he wins again if he loses either aspect. I think he needs both, which is a challenge for him.
Of course (1) is quite easy to maintain or even burnish - just keep up the trash talk - but (2) not so much.
And if he loses that, what then does he become? A rich superannuated bigot with a dirty mouth. That gets you places, of course it does, but it will not get you a 2nd term in the White House.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
It was black voting rates plunging.
Not the whole story either, Trump won voters with only a high school education or less 51% to 45% for Hillary, Romney lost voters with only a high school education or less 48% to 51% for Obama
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
OT Bugger - as TSE predicted looks like England will make it to the 5th day to lose and thus provide another great chance for the remarkably strong positive correlation with spurs losing on the same day too...
I fear you may be safe. Long way to go today and Root has just thrown it away. Stokes looks very out of nick too.
No, the point is he's failed to do it. I'll say it again - his USP was "canny, unconventional business tycoon who gets things done", not "fat bloke who broadly supports things you like but will fold embarrassingly when confronted with an elderly lady from California".
Yes, his big plus points to his base IMO are:
1. Saying Non PC (aka primitive and vulgar) things which echo their own baser sentiments. 2. Being a hard ass Businessman Who Gets Things Done. A wheeler dealer. A doer.
Where (1) means "He's just like one of us" and (2) adds on "But he's also a proven billionaire boss-man and so we look up to him and trust him to deliver on stuff".
It was Trump's killer achievement to successfully present this duality in 2016 and I don't think he wins again if he loses either aspect. I think he needs both, which is a challenge for him.
Of course (1) is quite easy to maintain or even burnish - just keep up the trash talk - but (2) not so much.
And if he loses that, what then does he become? A rich superannuated bigot with a dirty mouth. That gets you places, of course it does, but it will not get you a 2nd term in the White House.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
Err ... that was the exact point I was making in my post.
Trump mixed (1) blue collar appeal with (2) 'can do' businessman appeal.
And he needs to keep both in order to be re-elected. Just (1) won't cut it. Neither will just (2) - hence Romney.
My further observation was that IMO it is easier for Trump to keep (1) than (2) as he goes through his 1st term.
No, the point is he's failed to do it. I'll say it again - his USP was "canny, unconventional business tycoon who gets things done", not "fat bloke who broadly supports things you like but will fold embarrassingly when confronted with an elderly lady from California".
Yes, his big plus points to his base IMO are:
1. Saying Non PC (aka primitive and vulgar) things which echo their own baser sentiments. 2. Being a hard ass Businessman Who Gets Things Done. A wheeler dealer. A doer.
Where (1) means "He's just like one of us" and (2) adds on "But he's also a proven billionaire boss-man and so we look up to him and trust him to deliver on stuff".
It was Trump's killer achievement to successfully present this duality in 2016 and I don't think he wins again if he loses either aspect. I think he needs both, which is a challenge for him.
Of course (1) is quite easy to maintain or even burnish - just keep up the trash talk - but (2) not so much.
And if he loses that, what then does he become? A rich superannuated bigot with a dirty mouth. That gets you places, of course it does, but it will not get you a 2nd term in the White House.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
Obama was a much stronger candidate than Hillary.
Obama won those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Hillary lost those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Though Romney narrowly won college graduates who did not do postgraduate study unlike Trump but 50% of voters fall into the former category only 32% into the latter. The fact Obama appealed more to bluecollar voters than Hillary was therefore crucial
Just saw Mary Queen of Scots. Knowing only a little of the time period the 17th Century wsa more my bag), my main takeaways, based on the movie, are:
1) Apparently people kept betraying Mary over and over again for basically no reason;
2) John Knox hated women
Contrary to critical opinion I preferred Mary Queen of Scots to the Favourite
I did too, as it happens. The bits of The Favourite which worked did so very well, and in those moments were probably superior, but flaws aside Mary Queen of Scots was more cohesive, more interesting and grander in ambition. And didn't have a soundtrack which was like a bad piano player randomly banging offkey notes for 90 minutes.
As a historical piece though it did feel like things were happening for rather underexplained reasons - besides Knox's diatribes, there seemed little explanation or acknowledgement of why Mary was facing trouble in Scotland, and character's turned on a sixpence also with little explanation, like Bothwell's heel turn.
Oh yes, and actually the third main takeaway I took from the film was this:
I am not going along with bigging up of Pelosi. Trump took a big mouthful of something he couldn’t chew and swallow, the result plopped into Pelosi’s lap.
Wiki leaks clearly an intermediary in a heinous crime. Is it time for wiki leaks defenders to see not freedom fighters but anarchists and traitor to liberal and libertarian cause?
Yes and Hong Kong too is facing a crackdown on the pro democracy opposition, the Communist Party still wants capitalism on its own terms.
China is unlikely to expand military adventures much beyond its borders but Taiwan is the likeliest flashpoint. Russia is still far more willing to challenge the West with military expeditions to the Middle East etc than China is
I recall them invading Vietnam with minimal success.
My recent trip to Vietnam was remarkably illuminating. The highlight, politically, was my guide in Saigon. He was a handsome dude in his forties, recently married to his 3rd wife, and with 4 sons. He was keen to talk sex, and politics. I discovered his Dad was once the media minister for the Vietnamese government in Hanoi, and was something of a hero of the War against America
Yet this guy railed against the commie government, said it was totally corrupt. He showed me apartments in central Saigon costing 1-3 million dollars. All owned or sold by communist party officials. He also explained how much Vietnam feared and loathed China, and felt increasingly encircled by it, as China has made Laos and Cambodia total satellites and puppet governments, and at the same time has built bases on islands all down the Vietnamese coast.
The ironic peak was reached when he told me Vietnam needed and wanted a deep friendship with Trump’s America, to balance Chinese power. He was serious, and he was smart. It was fascinating.
Interesting. I would have thought that their more natural ally was Japan.
Yes, I asked him exactly that. He laughed the idea away. I think Japan is still quietly loathed throughout the region, because of the Second World War (understandably, when you look at what Japan did). Also it is perceived as a declining nation, with no power to project. America still seems puissant.
If I was going to pick one country that is going to make non human warfare work on the battle field it would be Japan. They are already using robots more imaginatively than anyone else
If I was going to pick one country that *could* make non-human warfare work on the battlefield it would be Japan. But if I was going to one that is going to, I'd say Russia or N Korea.
Our concept of non-human warfare is stuck a bit sci-fi. Non-human warfare is not about robots fighting each other; it's about destroying electronic infrastructure. Software, not hardware.
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
Good. But I’ve not seen it once since the barstewards banned it originally.
Precisely the sort of nit picking nonsenses the EU got itself involved in from time time that it never seemed to twig were PR disasters for it, and laid the fertile ground for those ones which were urban myths like the straight bananas to gain traction.
“Why is some faceless bureaucracy in Brussels telling me what I can or can’t eat in my local curry house down the High St”? It matters not whether it’s right or wrong in each case, it all added to the potency of “take back control”.
Brussels PR for forty years in the UK was just God awful.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
Err ... that was the exact point I was making in my post.
Trump mixed (1) blue collar appeal with (2) 'can do' businessman appeal.
And he needs to keep both in order to be re-elected. Just (1) won't cut it. Neither will just (2) - hence Romney.
My further observation was that IMO it is easier for Trump to keep (1) than (2) as he goes through his 1st term.
Thanks for the opportunity ... :-)
He needs 1 to do the rustbelt, he does not need 2, especially now he has a Democratic Congress and as there is a strong chance of the Democrats nominating another elitist coastal liberal
Just saw Mary Queen of Scots. Knowing only a little of the time period the 17th Century wsa more my bag), my main takeaways, based on the movie, are:
1) Apparently people kept betraying Mary over and over again for basically no reason;
2) John Knox hated women
Contrary to critical opinion I preferred Mary Queen of Scots to the Favourite
I did too, as it happens. The bits of The Favourite which worked did so very well, and in those moments were probably superior, but flaws aside Mary Queen of Scots was more cohesive, more interesting and grander in ambition. And didn't have a soundtrack which was like a bad piano player randomly banging offkey notes for 90 minutes.
As a historical piece though it did feel like things were happening for rather underexplained reasons - besides Knox's diatribes, there seemed little explanation or acknowledgement of why Mary was facing trouble in Scotland, and character's turned on a sixpence also with little explanation, like Bothwell's heel turn.
Oh yes, and actually the third main takeaway I took from the film was this:
3) Advisers are always evil. But we knew that.
Mary Queen of Scots was good drama but less good history.
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
Good. But I’ve not seen it once since the barstewards banned it originally.
Precisely the sort of nit picking nonsenses the EU got itself involved in from time time that it never seemed to twig were PR disasters for it, and laid the fertile ground for those ones which were urban myths like the straight bananas to gain traction.
“Why is some faceless bureaucracy in Brussels telling me what I can or can’t eat in my local curry house down the High St”? It matters not whether it’s right or wrong in each case, it all added to the potency if “take back control”.
Brussels PR for forty years in the UK was just God awful.
It was banned in response to a salmonella outbreak and has been allowed since 2000 with tighter controls:
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
Corbyn would as did 301 MPs last July and Juncker clearly has noted that so is mischief making
The EU have always had the stronger position because they can very well see how divided this country is, and know that substantial portions of it want remain, or something as close as possible to it, so they are much more comfortable making demands and playing hardball.
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.
We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
Good. But I’ve not seen it once since the barstewards banned it originally.
Precisely the sort of nit picking nonsenses the EU got itself involved in from time time that it never seemed to twig were PR disasters for it, and laid the fertile ground for those ones which were urban myths like the straight bananas to gain traction.
“Why is some faceless bureaucracy in Brussels telling me what I can or can’t eat in my local curry house down the High St”? It matters not whether it’s right or wrong in each case, it all added to the potency if “take back control”.
Brussels PR for forty years in the UK was just God awful.
It was banned in response to a salmonella outbreak and has been allowed since 2000 with tighter controls:
Bombay duck: iconic fish fast disappearing from city's coastal waters
So why not ban eggs and chicken?
It was just plain annoying. Pretty much only affected people in the UK not on the continent ( well barely), and was enacted by Brussels. Trivial of itself, yes of course, but Brussels kept on walking into doors like this, unnecessarily from a PR viewpoint. They added up in the back of minds.
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
Good. But I’ve not seen it once since the barstewards banned it originally.
Precisely the sort of nit picking nonsenses the EU got itself involved in from time time that it never seemed to twig were PR disasters for it, and laid the fertile ground for those ones which were urban myths like the straight bananas to gain traction.
“Why is some faceless bureaucracy in Brussels telling me what I can or can’t eat in my local curry house down the High St”? It matters not whether it’s right or wrong in each case, it all added to the potency of “take back control”.
Brussels PR for forty years in the UK was just God awful.
Presumably then it's changed public taste that's caused a dearth of duck rather than the EU?
Getting het up about something which you thought was banned by the EU but isn't seems like a handy metaphor.
France is not a happy place, and every revolution devours its children.
My recent trip there showed me a country hell bent on decline (despite its incredible luck and natural advantages). It is quite tragic. I’m not sure Macron is the man to solve it... but I wouldn’t dismiss his chances entirely. We shall see.
Either way, do we want Britain to be politically united with dysfunctional societies like this? Comtemporary France is hardly an advert for an evermore integrating EU.
Expect Macron to start laying into Brexit again as a distraction I guess.
I kid, his polling has gone up in the last few weeks as I understand it, so he's probably doing something right.
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
Corbyn would as did 301 MPs last July and Juncker clearly has noted that so is mischief making
The EU have always had the stronger position because they can very well see how divided this country is, and know that substantial portions of it want remain, or something as close as possible to it, so they are much more comfortable making demands and playing hardball.
Indeed. The EU will have noted just 202 MPs voted for May's Deal this month but 301 MPs voted for a permanent Customs Union last July so it makes logical and tactical sense for the EU to insist May must now move to the more BINO Brexit of the latter if she wants something that can have a Commons majority and they will consider. If the Commons votes for the Spelman Dromey amendment ruling out No Deal the EU's hand in pushing for a more BINO Brexit becomes even stronger
I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Do you think millions of voters knew or cared that this was the case? There were many reasons for the vote, but I doubt 'it is hard to change an EU law or directive' was high for the vast majority of people.
The stupidity burns
Eh?
I’m saying you are a very stupid person. Is that clear? Good.
Having to explain your own insults and answering your own questions are the hallmarks of a Brexit thickie
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.
We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.
MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
Good. But I’ve not seen it once since the barstewards banned it originally.
Precisely the sort of nit picking nonsenses the EU got itself involved in from time time that it never seemed to twig were PR disasters for it, and laid the fertile ground for those ones which were urban myths like the straight bananas to gain traction.
“Why is some faceless bureaucracy in Brussels telling me what I can or can’t eat in my local curry house down the High St”? It matters not whether it’s right or wrong in each case, it all added to the potency of “take back control”.
Brussels PR for forty years in the UK was just God awful.
Presumably then it's changed public taste that's caused a dearth of duck rather than the EU?
Getting het up about something which you thought was banned by the EU but isn't seems like a handy metaphor.
It was banned by the EU. And the unbanned, fair enough.
Yes it’s a silly little thing, I freely admit. But ‘‘twas but one amongst others .
He needs 1 to do the rustbelt, he does not need 2, especially now he has a Democratic Congress and as there is a strong chance of the Democrats nominating another elitist coastal liberal
(2) speaks to (perceived) competence. He needs that for everywhere inc. the rustbelt.
It is an integral part (along with being trashy) of his appeal.
Strip that away and he does not get re-elected. Not even if it's Hillary again.
No, the point is he's failed to do it. I'll say it again - his USP was "canny, unconventional business tycoon who gets things done", not "fat bloke who broadly supports things you like but will fold embarrassingly when confronted with an elderly lady from California".
Yes, his big plus points to his base IMO are:
1. Saying Non PC (aka primitive and vulgar) things which echo their own baser sentiments. 2. Being a hard ass Businessman Who Gets Things Done. A wheeler dealer. A doer.
Where (1) means "He's just like one of us" and (2) adds on "But he's also a proven billionaire boss-man and so we look up to him and trust him to deliver on stuff".
It was Trump's killer achievement to successfully present this duality in 2016 and I don't think he wins again if he loses either aspect. I think he needs both, which is a challenge for him.
Of course (1) is quite easy to maintain or even burnish - just keep up the trash talk - but (2) not so much.
And if he loses that, what then does he become? A rich superannuated bigot with a dirty mouth. That gets you places, of course it does, but it will not get you a 2nd term in the White House.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
Obama was a much stronger candidate than Hillary.
Obama won those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Hillary lost those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Though Romney narrowly won college graduates who did not do postgraduate study unlike Trump but 50% of voters fall into the former category only 32% into the latter. The fact Obama appealed more to bluecollar voters than Hillary was therefore crucial
It is, but it's still a different point. I think that Romney would have beaten Hillary by more than Trump did, and Obama would have smashed Trump out of the park.
France is not a happy place, and every revolution devours its children.
My recent trip there showed me a country hell bent on decline (despite its incredible luck and natural advantages). It is quite tragic. I’m not sure Macron is the man to solve it... but I wouldn’t dismiss his chances entirely. We shall see.
Either way, do we want Britain to be politically united with dysfunctional societies like this? Comtemporary France is hardly an advert for an evermore integrating EU.
Expect Macron to start laying into Brexit again as a distraction I guess.
I kid, his polling has gone up in the last few weeks as I understand it, so he's probably doing something right.
What chance we ask for an extension and Macron says “non”?
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.
We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.
MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
Just watched the first episode of Korean zombie series Kingdom on Netflix. V. good, if you enjoy that sort of thing.
On your recommendation I have started binge watching this show. It's not so very gory (the outbreaks of blood-saturated cannibalism and decapitation are merely intermittent,) but it is quite enjoyable nonetheless.
Of course, I won't be saying this if and when the inevitable zombie apocalypse occurs in the wake of No Deal Brexit (I believe that it is number 37 on the official list of horrors to come, in between super-gonorrhoea and the Black Death,) but so long as I make sure to purchase some nice sharp swords I feel like I'm in with a reasonable chance of survival.
France is not a happy place, and every revolution devours its children.
My recent trip there showed me a country hell bent on decline (despite its incredible luck and natural advantages). It is quite tragic. I’m not sure Macron is the man to solve it... but I wouldn’t dismiss his chances entirely. We shall see.
Either way, do we want Britain to be politically united with dysfunctional societies like this? Comtemporary France is hardly an advert for an evermore integrating EU.
Expect Macron to start laying into Brexit again as a distraction I guess.
I kid, his polling has gone up in the last few weeks as I understand it, so he's probably doing something right.
What chance we ask for an extension and Macron says “non”?
Wouldn’t blame him frankly.
I would hope that would depend on what we are asking an extension for. It would not be within his or the EU's interests for us to have more time 'just because' as we want more time to faff about.
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.
We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.
MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
And more voted against it...
301 for a permanent customs union versus 202 for a temporary customs union?
France is not a happy place, and every revolution devours its children.
My recent trip there showed me a country hell bent on decline (despite its incredible luck and natural advantages). It is quite tragic. I’m not sure Macron is the man to solve it... but I wouldn’t dismiss his chances entirely. We shall see.
Either way, do we want Britain to be politically united with dysfunctional societies like this? Comtemporary France is hardly an advert for an evermore integrating EU.
Expect Macron to start laying into Brexit again as a distraction I guess.
I kid, his polling has gone up in the last few weeks as I understand it, so he's probably doing something right.
What chance we ask for an extension and Macron says “non”?
Wouldn’t blame him frankly.
I would hope that would depend on what we are asking an extension for. It would not be within his or the EU's interests for us to have more time 'just because' as we want more time to faff about.
Quite. And the “extenders” want the faff time to just try and wear us all down to remain, that’s all.
France is not a happy place, and every revolution devours its children.
My recent trip there showed me a country hell bent on decline (despite its incredible luck and natural advantages). It is quite tragic. I’m not sure Macron is the man to solve it... but I wouldn’t dismiss his chances entirely. We shall see.
Either way, do we want Britain to be politically united with dysfunctional societies like this? Comtemporary France is hardly an advert for an evermore integrating EU.
Expect Macron to start laying into Brexit again as a distraction I guess.
I kid, his polling has gone up in the last few weeks as I understand it, so he's probably doing something right.
Yes, I think his polling has improved (albeit from a very low base, and marginally) as the Yellow Vests have gone on too long, and are now perceived as incoherent and a tad extreme. Which is fair, as they are. Some of their “demands” are beyond absurd, and are actively contradictory
Question is, will Macron be Ted Heath facing the striking miners, or Margaret Thatcher?
The Yellow Vests have made a terrible mistake in standing in the EU elections this year. They will be just another left wing grouping, and if they end up on 4%, they will have advertised their lack of broad popular support.
A permanent customs union is nuts. No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
The EU want a customs union really bad, in large part because of their huge trade surplus with us. It isn’t acceptable to MPs as has been demonstrated 6 times in the HoC.
We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.
MPs voted just 307 to 301 against a Customs Union last July, more MPs have voted for permanent Customs Union than any other Brexit proposal so far
And more voted against it...
Just 307 MPs voted against permanent Customs Union to 432 against May's Deal, it would be ironic if by voting down May's Deal the ERG ended up seeing a Commons majority for the more BINO permanent Customs Union.
The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
Brexit polling in Germany (Forschungsgruppe Wahlen):
UK and the EU, what will be the outcome?
No Deal: 33% Brexit Deal: 28% Remain: 31%
"Brexit: In case of further negotiations, should the EU make further concessions?"
Yes: 20% No: 73%
Brexit is a...
good thing: 7% bad thing: 75% does not matter: 16%
Asking anyone if there should be further concessions is such a pointless question. No one likes making concessions, no one thinks they should have to make them. It's a complex question about whether a specific concession is necessary or worthy for what it enables, and a question like that just invites anyone to get their backs up. Diplomats, we can hope, put more thought into things. They may well come to the same conclusion, but that's by the by.
No, the point is he's failed to do it. I'll say it again - his USP was "canny, unconventional business tycoon who gets things done", not "fat bloke who broadly supports things you like but will fold embarrassingly when confronted with an elderly lady from California".
Yes, his big plus points to his base IMO are:
1. Saying Non PC (aka primitive and vulgar) things which echo their own baser sentiments. 2. Being a hard ass Businessman Who Gets Things Done. A wheeler dealer. A doer.
Where (1) means "He's just like one of us" and (2) adds on "But he's also a proven billionaire boss-man and so we look up to him and trust him to deliver on stuff".
It was Trump's killer achievement to successfully present this duality in 2016 and I don't think he wins again if he loses either aspect. I think he needs both, which is a challenge for him.
Of course (1) is quite easy to maintain or even burnish - just keep up the trash talk - but (2) not so much.
And if he loses that, what then does he become? A rich superannuated bigot with a dirty mouth. That gets you places, of course it does, but it will not get you a 2nd term in the White House.
2 Is not really true otherwise Romney would have won in 2012.
It was being able to appeal to blue collar rustbelt voters in a way Romney could not that was pivotal to Trump's election, if the Democrats pick another liberal, coastal elitist Trump will win those voters again and the Electoral College
Obama was a much stronger candidate than Hillary.
Obama won those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Hillary lost those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Though Romney narrowly won college graduates who did not do postgraduate study unlike Trump but 50% of voters fall into the former category only 32% into the latter. The fact Obama appealed more to bluecollar voters than Hillary was therefore crucial
It is, but it's still a different point. I think that Romney would have beaten Hillary by more than Trump did, and Obama would have smashed Trump out of the park.
I think Romney would have done better in the West than Trump but worse than Trump in the Midwest and rustbelt.
He needs 1 to do the rustbelt, he does not need 2, especially now he has a Democratic Congress and as there is a strong chance of the Democrats nominating another elitist coastal liberal
(2) speaks to (perceived) competence. He needs that for everywhere inc. the rustbelt.
It is an integral part (along with being trashy) of his appeal.
Strip that away and he does not get re-elected. Not even if it's Hillary again.
No, as I said if competence was pivotal in winning US elections Romney would have won a landslide in 2012 not lost. Romney was a far more successful and competent businessman than Trump but lacked Trump's populist appeal. It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal
I note that no one has risen to my challenge: tell us how you repeal an EU law, in two sentences.
This is because it cannot be done. This is why Brexit.
Do you think millions of voters knew or cared that this was the case? There were many reasons for the vote, but I doubt 'it is hard to change an EU law or directive' was high for the vast majority of people.
The stupidity burns
Eh?
I’m saying you are a very stupid person. Is that clear? Good.
Having to explain your own insults and answering your own questions are the hallmarks of a Brexit thickie
SeanT is actually one of the smarter Brexiters. He even has occasional moments of lucidity where he realises he sold his own country up the river.
Just watched the first episode of Korean zombie series Kingdom on Netflix. V. good, if you enjoy that sort of thing.
On your recommendation I have started binge watching this show. It's not so very gory (the outbreaks of blood-saturated cannibalism and decapitation are merely intermittent,) but it is quite enjoyable nonetheless.
Spoke too soon. Full-on, extended zombie rampage has just occurred.
A vision of life circa April 3rd when Tesco runs out of iceberg lettuces, no doubt.
Spain, Germany, France and the UK have warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that he must call elections within eight days - or they will officially recognise the opposition.
The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.
The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.
It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
The ideological assumptions underpinning their questioning have presumably alienated a significant portion of their potential audience.
You should have picked a different percentage if you didn't want to give the impression that you're unhappy with him because you perceive he doesn't sufficiently share your ideology. It's impossible for the beeb to keep everyone happy, but you're having a laugh if you think they should do more to pander towards you.
Alex Salmond will continue to host his own television programme despite being charged with attempted rape and sexual assault, BBC Scotland has learned. Russian broadcaster RT said it would continue to air The Alex Salmond Show.
“Despite being charged” - Innocent until proven guilt....now taking putins pounds, that is more of an issue.
Spain, Germany, France and the UK have warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that he must call elections within eight days - or they will officially recognise the opposition.
Fine but China, Russia, Turkey and Mexico have all backed Maduro and said there must be no outside interference in Venezuela. There is a clear Security Council split on this, Russia and China behind Maduro, the USA, UK and France behind the opposition and also a split in Latin America with Brazil, Argentina and Chile behind the opposition and Mexico and Bolivia behind Maduro so in the end I expect nothing will happen
Brexit polling in Germany (Forschungsgruppe Wahlen):
UK and the EU, what will be the outcome?
No Deal: 33% Brexit Deal: 28% Remain: 31%
"Brexit: In case of further negotiations, should the EU make further concessions?"
Yes: 20% No: 73%
Brexit is a...
good thing: 7% bad thing: 75% does not matter: 16%
I take it that implies 75% see it as bad for Germany
They may have been so brainwashed into EUSSR solidarity that they consider it a bad thing for the whole of the EU (of which, as everyone likes to remind everyone else, we are still a member).
The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.
The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.
It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
The ideological assumptions underpinning their questioning have presumably alienated a significant portion of their potential audience.
You should have picked a different percentage if you didn't want to give the impression that you're unhappy with him because you perceive he doesn't sufficiently share your ideology. It's impossible for the beeb to keep everyone happy, but you're having a laugh if you think they should do more to pander towards you.
As I pointed out earlier, the Today show is haemorrhaging listeners. Anecdotally this seems to be because, in his dotage, Humphries has become a rabid reactionary and an increasing number can’t be arsed listening to his guff over breakfast.
Brexit polling in Germany (Forschungsgruppe Wahlen):
UK and the EU, what will be the outcome?
No Deal: 33% Brexit Deal: 28% Remain: 31%
"Brexit: In case of further negotiations, should the EU make further concessions?"
Yes: 20% No: 73%
Brexit is a...
good thing: 7% bad thing: 75% does not matter: 16%
I take it that implies 75% see it as bad for Germany
They may have been so brainwashed into EUSSR solidarity that they consider it a bad thing for the whole of the EU (of which, as everyone likes to remind everyone else, we are still a member).
Spain, Germany, France and the UK have warned Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro that he must call elections within eight days - or they will officially recognise the opposition.
Fine but China, Russia, Turkey and Mexico have all backed Maduro and said there must be no outside interference in Venezuela. There is a clear Security Council split on this, Russia and China behind Maduro, the USA, UK and France behind the opposition and also a split in Latin America with Brazil, Argentina and Chile behind the opposition and Mexico and Bolivia behind Maduro so in the end I expect nothing will happen
Not a good place for Corbyn's views and politics to be in
Brexit polling in Germany (Forschungsgruppe Wahlen):
UK and the EU, what will be the outcome?
No Deal: 33% Brexit Deal: 28% Remain: 31%
"Brexit: In case of further negotiations, should the EU make further concessions?"
Yes: 20% No: 73%
Brexit is a...
good thing: 7% bad thing: 75% does not matter: 16%
I take it that implies 75% see it as bad for Germany
They may have been so brainwashed into EUSSR solidarity that they consider it a bad thing for the whole of the EU (of which, as everyone likes to remind everyone else, we are still a member).
What is the EUSSR?
Is it what lunatics call the EU?
It is indeed. Confusingly often conflated with modern Germany's similarity to the Third Reich.
The Today Show lost more than 10% of its audience 17 to 18. I suspect the haemorrhage has continued.
The problem is, Humphreys is undoubtedly popular with a majority - let’s say 52% - of the audience. The rest are voting with their feet.
I would guess that the 48% who voted remain are overrepresented among BBC current affairs presenters and reporters.
No doubt. But they manage to hold their opinion without foreigner-baiting and random misogyny.
It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
The ideological assumptions underpinning their questioning have presumably alienated a significant portion of their potential audience.
You should have picked a different percentage if you didn't want to give the impression that you're unhappy with him because you perceive he doesn't sufficiently share your ideology. It's impossible for the beeb to keep everyone happy, but you're having a laugh if you think they should do more to pander towards you.
As I pointed out earlier, the Today show is haemorrhaging listeners. Anecdotally this seems to be because, in his dotage, Humphries has become a rabid reactionary and an increasing number can’t be arsed listening to his guff over breakfast.
I suppose any change in direction will need to be promoted if it isn't to alienate more current listeners than potential ones who will otherwise be unaware of it. Given the old have more time to listen to the wireless and tend to be more reactionary, perhaps the BBC could make the most of an apparent opportunity.
Just in case nobody has pointed this out: the Pelosi check on Trump is a fine example of the checks and balances written by the constitution's creators.
She has said that she is knowledgeable about dealing with infants.
Of course Pelosi's quality shines through Trump's murk. Indeed, if memory serves it was she who urged Obama to push his health care bill through Congress. I wonder what she can do to save/improve it.
Comments
If we do actually Brexit, do you think the UK will abandon it?
He subsequently apologised for even asking, said he completely understood, and wasn’t clear why Australians had heard so little about it.
Such a fallback position does not require a customs union between the UK and the EU or a border in the North Sea. Instead there is a border between Ireland and the EU.
It says a lot that the US declaration of independence - a document which has stood for over 240 years - was less than 1400 words long and would fit on less than 4 A4 pages.
Our withdrawal agreement from the EU by contrast runs to nearly 600 pages - and that doesn't even set the detail for our future relationship!
If only it was as easy to leave the EU in legal terms as to create the United States of America!
But no, on Norway plus being a girl, what I had in mind was the female tendency to seek out compromise over confrontation.
Hope I was, anyway. Hope I was not just thinking of towering blondes.
Seems unlikely.
I thought there was an EU Directive about Droit du seigneur for a minute.
We get 15% of the vote on things like the red tape fest that is GDPR, and can’t repeal it by electing people to Westminster, or firing them.
It is a huge problem.
I’m still sore Bombay Duck was effectively banned by the EU. That’s another one we can put on the list of things to repeal...
1) Apparently people kept betraying Mary over and over again for basically no reason;
2) John Knox hated women
VICTORY NEWS: BOMBAY DUCK HAS BEEN SAVED!!!!
Following my request, the Indian High Commission approached the European Commission about the ban. The EC adjusted the regulations so that the fish can still be dried in the open air but has to be packed in an "EC approved" packing station. Now a Birmingham wholesale merchant has found a packing source in Mumbai/Bombay and the product is again available.
https://twitter.com/JudithFlanders/status/1084476779501375488
Trump mixed (1) blue collar appeal with (2) 'can do' businessman appeal.
And he needs to keep both in order to be re-elected. Just (1) won't cut it. Neither will just (2) - hence Romney.
My further observation was that IMO it is easier for Trump to keep (1) than (2) as he goes through his 1st term.
Thanks for the opportunity ... :-)
Hillary lost those with only a high school education or less and those with only some college.
Though Romney narrowly won college graduates who did not do postgraduate study unlike Trump but 50% of voters fall into the former category only 32% into the latter. The fact Obama appealed more to bluecollar voters than Hillary was therefore crucial
As a historical piece though it did feel like things were happening for rather underexplained reasons - besides Knox's diatribes, there seemed little explanation or acknowledgement of why Mary was facing trouble in Scotland, and character's turned on a sixpence also with little explanation, like Bothwell's heel turn.
Oh yes, and actually the third main takeaway I took from the film was this:
3) Advisers are always evil. But we knew that.
No self-respecting Brexiter would vote for that.
https://twitter.com/Julesbdo/status/1089162166551363585
Our concept of non-human warfare is stuck a bit sci-fi. Non-human warfare is not about robots fighting each other; it's about destroying electronic infrastructure. Software, not hardware.
It would be disappointing.
Would much prefer him taken alive.
Precisely the sort of nit picking nonsenses the EU got itself involved in from time time that it never seemed to twig were PR disasters for it, and laid the fertile ground for those ones which were urban myths like the straight bananas to gain traction.
“Why is some faceless bureaucracy in Brussels telling me what I can or can’t eat in my local curry house down the High St”? It matters not whether it’s right or wrong in each case, it all added to the potency of “take back control”.
Brussels PR for forty years in the UK was just God awful.
The Favourite was just played as a farce
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1066998.stm
If you can't get it these days it might have more to do with scarcity:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2013/mar/22/bombay-duck-mumbai-fish
Bombay duck: iconic fish fast disappearing from city's coastal waters
We’ve proposed something really similar, that’s gives them what they want (tariff and friction free access to our markets) and they’ve rejected it.
It was just plain annoying. Pretty much only affected people in the UK not on the continent ( well barely), and was enacted by Brussels. Trivial of itself, yes of course, but Brussels kept on walking into doors like this, unnecessarily from a PR viewpoint. They added up in the back of minds.
Getting het up about something which you thought was banned by the EU but isn't seems like a handy metaphor.
I kid, his polling has gone up in the last few weeks as I understand it, so he's probably doing something right.
Yes it’s a silly little thing, I freely admit. But ‘‘twas but one amongst others .
It is an integral part (along with being trashy) of his appeal.
Strip that away and he does not get re-elected. Not even if it's Hillary again.
What chance we ask for an extension and Macron says “non”?
Wouldn’t blame him frankly.
Of course, I won't be saying this if and when the inevitable zombie apocalypse occurs in the wake of No Deal Brexit (I believe that it is number 37 on the official list of horrors to come, in between super-gonorrhoea and the Black Death,) but so long as I make sure to purchase some nice sharp swords I feel like I'm in with a reasonable chance of survival.
UK and the EU, what will be the outcome?
No Deal: 33%
Brexit Deal: 28%
Remain: 31%
"Brexit: In case of further negotiations, should the EU make further concessions?"
Yes: 20%
No: 73%
Brexit is a...
good thing: 7%
bad thing: 75%
does not matter: 16%
The latter might also be acceptable to the DUP as it would apply to the whole UK
Obama would have beaten Trump I agree
It is he who best appeals to blue collar voters in the rustbelt and their fears and concerns that is pivotal
It’s time Humphries was retired off. He is increasingly addled and has no place on what is supposed to be an agenda-setting current affairs show.
SeanT is actually one of the smarter Brexiters. He even has occasional moments of lucidity where he realises he sold his own country up the river.
A vision of life circa April 3rd when Tesco runs out of iceberg lettuces, no doubt.
Much rather have one that accurately reports the news.
You should have picked a different percentage if you didn't want to give the impression that you're unhappy with him because you perceive he doesn't sufficiently share your ideology. It's impossible for the beeb to keep everyone happy, but you're having a laugh if you think they should do more to pander towards you.
“Despite being charged” - Innocent until proven guilt....now taking putins pounds, that is more of an issue.
For me it is TM deal or modified, or remain. Norway is a fudge achieving no benefits and really has nothing going for it
Of course, the HOC taking no deal off the table plays entirely into the EU hands
It looks to me that ERG are going to fail due to their own ineptitude
Is it what lunatics call the EU?
His challenges lie elsewhere, though lack of competence is not a good look.
"I take it that implies 75% see it as bad for Germany."
Are you surprised? Guess who will have to make up the missing billions in contributions. France will make sure it's not them.
She has said that she is knowledgeable about dealing with infants.
Of course Pelosi's quality shines through Trump's murk.
Indeed, if memory serves it was she who urged Obama to push his health care bill through Congress. I wonder what she can do to save/improve it.