This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
Ain't life grand!
Not if you have to teach the thing and try to guess what schoolboy howler the Principal Examiner is going to make next.
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
Now I appreciate somebody whose knowledge of education and history comes from the work of liar, forger and pseudoscholar Dominic Cummings is going to be overloaded with myths.
But I think you will find if you check carefully that actually William won. That's why the entire fecking module is called 'The Norman Conquest of England 1066-1100.'
This is one of a huge number of errors I have been coming across, although it's the daftest. For example, claims about the importance of universities in Norman England (there weren't any, Oxford being a school at the time) or that the Duke of Suffolk wasn't murdered in 1450 (astonishingly, an error that wasn't overturned on both appeal and complaint). And these are at least partly due to the rushed way your hero brought in these reforms and the incompetence he and his acolytes showed in administering them.
As for your personal abuse about my qualifications, when you tell me you have written five history books, eight scholarly articles and worked in a university history department as a lecturer for four years I'll accept that from you, and not one second before.
I don’t have quite in front of me but I do t think it did
I think it is poorly written but trying to say that you can argue that Harold was a brilliant and imaginative commander - against all the odds he did incredible things and his troops nearly managed to hold out
Wasn’t the Battle of Hastings was lost because Harold allowed his troops to leave a hugely advantageous positition at the top of a hill to chase what he mistakenly thought was a retreating Norman force?
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
Ain't life grand!
My money is on William to win, though hard to be sure in the world of fake news.
I reckon that those tapestry workers couldn't do needlework quickly enough to catch all of the action.
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
Ain't life grand!
Not if you have to teach the thing and try to guess what schoolboy howler the Principal Examiner is going to make next.
Oh, and you've missed SeanT's unfortunate wine.
Got up your nose, hasn't it. Understandably of course.
The curriculum, that is, not the wine. And you are, of course, right about me missing the wine!
Now I appreciate somebody whose knowledge of education and history comes from the work of liar, forger and pseudoscholar Dominic Cummings is going to be overloaded with myths.
But I think you will find if you check carefully that actually William won. That's why the entire fecking module is called 'The Norman Conquest of England 1066-1100.'
This is one of a huge number of errors I have been coming across, although it's the daftest. For example, claims about the importance of universities in Norman England (there weren't any, Oxford being a school at the time) or that the Duke of Suffolk wasn't murdered in 1450 (astonishingly, an error that wasn't overturned on both appeal and complaint). And these are at least partly due to the rushed way your hero brought in these reforms and the incompetence he and his acolytes showed in administering them.
As for your personal abuse about my qualifications, when you tell me you have written five history books, eight scholarly articles and worked in a university history department as a lecturer for four years I'll accept that from you, and not one second before.
I don’t have quite in front of me but I do t think it did
I think it is poorly written but trying to say that you can argue that Harold was a brilliant and imaginative commander - against all the odds he did incredible things and his troops nearly managed to hold out
Wasn’t the Battle of Hastings was lost because Harold allowed his troops to leave a hugely advantageous positition at the top of a hill to chase what he mistakenly thought was a retreating Norman force?
It's not quite clear whether he allowed them to, or whether the inexperienced Home Counties fyrd just got carried away. Or indeed, how much of an influence that had on the outcome of the battle, although the prominence given to it by Norman chroniclers suggest it was considered important at the time (especially as they attribute the idea to William).
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
Ain't life grand!
Not if you have to teach the thing and try to guess what schoolboy howler the Principal Examiner is going to make next.
Oh, and you've missed SeanT's unfortunate wine.
Got up your nose, hasn't it. Understandably of course.
The curriculum, that is, not the wine. And you are, of course, right about me missing the wine!
You're damn right it has.
And I always find wine up the nose unpleasant. Much nicer to drink it through the ear holes.
(That last sentence was to demonstrate how most comments on exam reform by Gove and his apologists come across.)
Sad though I am to leave; this site has quite cheered me up this morning, but my wife's morning coffee will not make itself, and then I have an appointment with a gymnasium.
Sad though I am to leave; this site has quite cheered me up this morning, but my wife's morning coffee will not make itself, and then I have an appointment with a gymnasium.
Just wait until they start teaching Brexit for history GCSE. The PB Brexit tapestry being one of the few pieces of primary evidence surviving that turbulent period.
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB? Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
This a political betting site, and two of the topics creating most interest this morning are a medical record from around the end of the 19th Century and the GCSE history curriculum, and specifically the Battle of Hastings.
Ain't life grand!
My money is on William to win, though hard to be sure in the world of fake news.
I reckon that those tapestry workers couldn't do needlework quickly enough to catch all of the action.
Now I appreciate somebody whose knowledge of education and history comes from the work of liar, forger and pseudoscholar Dominic Cummings is going to be overloaded with myths.
But I think you will find if you check carefully that actually William won. That's why the entire fecking module is called 'The Norman Conquest of England 1066-1100.'
This is one of a huge number of errors I have been coming across, although it's the daftest. For example, claims about the importance of universities in Norman England (there weren't any, Oxford being a school at the time) or that the Duke of Suffolk wasn't murdered in 1450 (astonishingly, an error that wasn't overturned on both appeal and complaint). And these are at least partly due to the rushed way your hero brought in these reforms and the incompetence he and his acolytes showed in administering them.
As for your personal abuse about my qualifications, when you tell me you have written five history books, eight scholarly articles and worked in a university history department as a lecturer for four years I'll accept that from you, and not one second before.
I don’t have quite in front of me but I do t think it did
I think it is poorly written but trying to say that you can argue that Harold was a brilliant and imaginative commander - against all the odds he did incredible things and his troops nearly managed to hold out
It said 'his army survived nearly the whole day to beat off William's attacks.'
Edit - I'm not making any comment either way on Harold's ability, just making the point that this sentence without qualification is simply wrong. What I think they meant to say was 'Harold's army maintained cohesion most off the day, beating off numerous attacks by the Normans, before breaking in the afternoon.' But that's not what it says.
Surely, "survived nearly the whole day" must imply "but it did not survive the whole day"?
But yes, this person should be given some LEGO rather than words to work with.
Just wait until they start teaching Brexit for history GCSE. The PB Brexit tapestry being one of the few pieces of primary evidence surviving that turbulent period.
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB? Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
Just wait until they start teaching Brexit for history GCSE. The PB Brexit tapestry being one of the few pieces of primary evidence surviving that turbulent period.
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB? Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
You're too late, it's already part of the syllabus.
Now I appreciate somebody whose knowledge of education and history comes from the work of liar, forger and pseudoscholar Dominic Cummings is going to be overloaded with myths.
But I think you will find if you check carefully that actually William won. That's why the entire fecking module is called 'The Norman Conquest of England 1066-1100.'
This is one of a huge number of errors I have been coming across, although it's the daftest. For example, claims about the importance of universities in Norman England (there weren't any, Oxford being a school at the time) or that the Duke of Suffolk wasn't murdered in 1450 (astonishingly, an error that wasn't overturned on both appeal and complaint). And these are at least partly due to the rushed way your hero brought in these reforms and the incompetence he and his acolytes showed in administering them.
As for your personal abuse about my qualifications, when you tell me you have written five history books, eight scholarly articles and worked in a university history department as a lecturer for four years I'll accept that from you, and not one second before.
I don’t have quite in front of me but I do t think it did
I think it is poorly written but trying to say that you can argue that Harold was a brilliant and imaginative commander - against all the odds he did incredible things and his troops nearly managed to hold out
It said 'his army survived nearly the whole day to beat off William's attacks.'
Edit - I'm not making any comment either way on Harold's ability, just making the point that this sentence without qualification is simply wrong. What I think they meant to say was 'Harold's army maintained cohesion most off the day, beating off numerous attacks by the Normans, before breaking in the afternoon.' But that's not what it says.
Surely, "survived nearly the whole day" must imply "but it did not survive the whole day"?
But yes, this person should be given some LEGO rather than words to work with.
The real problem is it implies the Saxons beat off all the Norman attacks. It overlooks the fairly important point that they broke at the last one...
(In any case, they seem to have lasted about five or six hours, which is not really 'nearly the whole day.' It's a bit like saying 'almost everyone voted Leave.')
Just wait until they start teaching Brexit for history GCSE. The PB Brexit tapestry being one of the few pieces of primary evidence surviving that turbulent period.
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB? Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
You're too late, it's already part of the syllabus.
Marvellous. Could someone take a sneak peek at the answer and tell us all what actually happens next?
Just wait until they start teaching Brexit for history GCSE. The PB Brexit tapestry being one of the few pieces of primary evidence surviving that turbulent period.
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB? Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
You're too late, it's already part of the syllabus.
Marvellous. Could someone take a sneak peek at the answer and tell us all what actually happens next?
Sorry, don't know that. My part ends in 2016 with the referendum. I haven't time to do a running commentary on the rest!
Just wait until they start teaching Brexit for history GCSE. The PB Brexit tapestry being one of the few pieces of primary evidence surviving that turbulent period.
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB? Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
You're too late, it's already part of the syllabus.
Marvellous. Could someone take a sneak peek at the answer and tell us all what actually happens next?
Its a tossup between two posturing loons, either a brexiteer or a remainer making some ludicrous comment.
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billion Euiropeans who might one day consider national independence, AND it has further lessons for other nations, across the globe, who might fancy their sovereign chances, head to head with elitist globalisation.
For once, a parochial focus on our own political debate is justified. Right now we ARE the centre of world attention. Will Brexit be a total catastrophe, will a great and ancient democracy continue to soil itself in public, or will, somehow, this country pull itself together and achieve a decent result and a new self respect? Or will the Queen be evacuated to the moon?
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
So how will she appeal to the rust belt and other parts of the US. Another West Coast liberal. Needs to pick her running mate carefully if she gets the nomination.
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billion Euiropeans who might one day consider national independence, AND it has further lessons for other nations, across the globe, who might fancy their sovereign chances, head to head with elitist globalisation.
For once, a parochial focus on our own political debate is justified. Right now we ARE the centre of world attention. Will Brexit be a total catastrophe, will a great and ancient democracy continue to soil itself in public, or will, somehow, this country pull itself together and achieve a decent result and a new self respect? Or will the Queen be evacuated to the moon?
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
I agree, it is very possible that Brexit will kill populism in the UK, before Amy unseats Trump.
I am curious: who writes this stuff? Teachers? Interns? YOP scheme kids?
I saw a GCSE Science course book that stated that polar bears hunt penguins.
No wonder the penguins have all fled to the other side of the planet!
Well, when you say other side of the planet...that's not strictly true. I have seen wild penguins in the northern hemisphere. By about 3 miles. Galapagos Penguins.
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billion Euiropeans who might one day consider national independence, AND it has further lessons for other nations, across the globe, who might fancy their sovereign chances, head to head with elitist globalisation.
For once, a parochial focus on our own political debate is justified. Right now we ARE the centre of world attention. Will Brexit be a total catastrophe, will a great and ancient democracy continue to soil itself in public, or will, somehow, this country pull itself together and achieve a decent result and a new self respect? Or will the Queen be evacuated to the moon?
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
I agree, it is very possible that Brexit will kill populism in the UK, before Amy unseats Trump.
That's wishful thinking on your part.
If you're really interested in doing that then tackle the root causes.
So how will she appeal to the rust belt and other parts of the US. Another West Coast liberal. Needs to pick her running mate carefully if she gets the nomination.
Klobuchar is raising real issues of interest to blue collar Americans. Definitely worth a punt.
I am curious: who writes this stuff? Teachers? Interns? YOP scheme kids?
I saw a GCSE Science course book that stated that polar bears hunt penguins.
No wonder the penguins have all fled to the other side of the planet!
Well, when you say other side of the planet...that's not strictly true. I have seen wild penguins in the northern hemisphere. By about 3 miles. Galapagos Penguins.
I am curious: who writes this stuff? Teachers? Interns? YOP scheme kids?
I saw a GCSE Science course book that stated that polar bears hunt penguins.
No wonder the penguins have all fled to the other side of the planet!
Well, when you say other side of the planet...that's not strictly true. I have seen wild penguins in the northern hemisphere. By about 3 miles. Galapagos Penguins.
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billion Euiropeans who might one day consider national independence, AND it has further lessons for other nations, across the globe, who might fancy their sovereign chances, head to head with elitist globalisation.
For once, a parochial focus on our own political debate is justified. Right now we ARE the centre of world attention. Will Brexit be a total catastrophe, will a great and ancient democracy continue to soil itself in public, or will, somehow, this country pull itself together and achieve a decent result and a new self respect? Or will the Queen be evacuated to the moon?
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
I agree, it is very possible that Brexit will kill populism in the UK, before Amy unseats Trump.
That's wishful thinking on your part.
If you're really interested in doing that then tackle the root causes.
That is why Brexit will fail. It will not address the root causes of discontent, indeed it will aggravate most of them.
So Liam Fox is going the Minford route and looking to abolish all tariffs.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
So Liam Fox is going the Minford route and looking to abolish all tariffs.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
Yep - someone really needs to ask Liam why every major country has a trade deal with South Korea. Hint - it's because their tariffs are so high you want one..
It's a big game of musical chairs. The first aim of some of these candidates is to get adequate name recognition to stay in to the point when the public start their proper scrutiny.
Conversely Kamala Harris has to spend the best part of a year walking on a tightrope between blandness and divisiveness. Not easy either.
I am curious: who writes this stuff? Teachers? Interns? YOP scheme kids?
I saw a GCSE Science course book that stated that polar bears hunt penguins.
No wonder the penguins have all fled to the other side of the planet!
Well, when you say other side of the planet...that's not strictly true. I have seen wild penguins in the northern hemisphere. By about 3 miles. Galapagos Penguins.
Were they hiding from bears?
I think the Pinta Island Polar Bear has gone the same way as the Pinta Island Tortoise. But I did get to see Lonesome George before he departed this world - and took the species with him.
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billion Euiropeans who might one day consider national independence, AND it has further lessons for other nations, across the globe, who might fancy their sovereign chances, head to head with elitist globalisation.
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
I agree, it is very possible that Brexit will kill populism in the UK, before Amy unseats Trump.
That's wishful thinking on your part.
If you're really interested in doing that then tackle the root causes.
That is why Brexit will fail. It will not address the root causes of discontent, indeed it will aggravate most of them.
It offers more direct control over migration by the UK Government and an end to EU federalisation. Those who advocate its reversal have nothing to say on either of those subjects other than to say they’ve proved their point.
They haven’t and, still more, still haven’t really understood or accepted its legitimacy in the first place so they can propose a credible solution.
So Liam Fox is going the Minford route and looking to abolish all tariffs.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
Yep - someone really needs to ask Liam why every major country has a trade deal with South Korea. Hint - it's because their tariffs are so high you want one..
Liam Fox is a disgraced former General Practitioner. Asking him his views on business and trade is akin to asking a trade commissioner his/her views on how to treat your haemorrhoids, and whether they would inspect them for you .
So Liam Fox is going the Minford route and looking to abolish all tariffs.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
Yep - someone really needs to ask Liam why every major country has a trade deal with South Korea. Hint - it's because their tariffs are so high you want one..
Liam Fox is a disgraced former General Practitioner. Asking him his views on business and trade is akin to asking a trade commissioner his/her views on how to treat your haemorrhoids, and whether they would inspect them for you .
Unless and until we call out politicians on their lack of knowledge in areas they claim to know things about or to be responsible for we will continue to be in this mess...
So Liam Fox is going the Minford route and looking to abolish all tariffs.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
Yep - someone really needs to ask Liam why every major country has a trade deal with South Korea. Hint - it's because their tariffs are so high you want one..
Liam Fox is a disgraced former General Practitioner. Asking him his views on business and trade is akin to asking a trade commissioner his/her views on how to treat your haemorrhoids, and whether they would inspect them for you .
Unless and until we call out politicians on their lack of knowledge in areas they claim to know things about or to be responsible for we will continue to be in this mess...
Indeed. There is a certain segment of our political class that appeals to the populist agenda by saying "we have had enough of experts".
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billion Euiropeans who might one day consider national independence, AND it has further lessons for other nations, across the globe, who might fancy their sovereign chances, head to head with elitist globalisation.
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
I agree, it is very possible that Brexit will kill populism in the UK, before Amy unseats Trump.
That's wishful thinking on your part.
If you're really interested in doing that then tackle the root causes.
That is why Brexit will fail. It will not address the root causes of discontent, indeed it will aggravate most of them.
It offers more direct control over migration by the UK Government and an end to EU federalisation. Those who advocate its reversal have nothing to say on either of those subjects other than to say they’ve proved their point.
They haven’t and, still more, still haven’t really understood or accepted its legitimacy in the first place so they can propose a credible solution.
Brexit might indeed offer more control on migration but since no-one in government or the wider Establishment has expressed the slightest desire actually to reduce immigration, what's the point?
So Liam Fox is going the Minford route and looking to abolish all tariffs.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
Yep - someone really needs to ask Liam why every major country has a trade deal with South Korea. Hint - it's because their tariffs are so high you want one..
Liam Fox is a disgraced former General Practitioner. Asking him his views on business and trade is akin to asking a trade commissioner his/her views on how to treat your haemorrhoids, and whether they would inspect them for you .
Unless and until we call out politicians on their lack of knowledge in areas they claim to know things about or to be responsible for we will continue to be in this mess...
Indeed. There is a certain segment of our political class that appeals to the populist agenda by saying "we have had enough of experts".
But we also have a press that simply won't call people out as the idiots they are..
I am curious: who writes this stuff? Teachers? Interns? YOP scheme kids?
I saw a GCSE Science course book that stated that polar bears hunt penguins.
No wonder the penguins have all fled to the other side of the planet!
Well, when you say other side of the planet...that's not strictly true. I have seen wild penguins in the northern hemisphere. By about 3 miles. Galapagos Penguins.
Were they hiding from bears?
I think the Pinta Island Polar Bear has gone the same way as the Pinta Island Tortoise. But I did get to see Lonesome George before he departed this world - and took the species with him.
Picks Pinta won the last race at Newcastle last night sending my running-on treble the way of the tortoise and polar bear.
If Corbyn wins the next General Election, doesn't that make him populist and therefore bad?
I only ask because I saw an article in the Guardian CiF discussing a statue to Mrs T in Grantham. It seems to me to be irrelevant (meh) but the assumption seems to be that it will be vandalised and it should be. Isn't that a populist reaction and bad?
Mind you, intolerance of a statue just seems barmy.
How do you define 'populist'? Does it have to be right-wing?
Seems like a deliberately obtuse interpretation of the proposal frankly, if it is even viable. People all over this issue are so unreasonable you wonder why they are against a hard border at all, since they seem keen to object to anything but the status quo, ensuring they must get that hard border. The situation is changing and things need to be monitored, I get the bad blood between our nation's but monitoring at a border is not inherently disgraceful.
If Corbyn wins the next General Election, doesn't that make him populist and therefore bad?
I only ask because I saw an article in the Guardian CiF discussing a statue to Mrs T in Grantham. It seems to me to be irrelevant (meh) but the assumption seems to be that it will be vandalised and it should be. Isn't that a populist reaction and bad?
Mind you, intolerance of a statue just seems barmy.
How do you define 'populist'? Does it have to be right-wing?
So how will she appeal to the rust belt and other parts of the US. Another West Coast liberal. Needs to pick her running mate carefully if she gets the nomination.
Klobuchar is raising real issues of interest to blue collar Americans. Definitely worth a punt.
I'm not sure I give a tiny floating scintilla of a fuckette, but I appreciate the need for the site to vary from Brexit, every so often.
Seat T doesn't care. How sad
Mike, I wasn't being insulting, quite the opposite. I admire your ability (at an advanced age) to keep bettors interested in things OTHER than Brexit. It is part of the site's USP, and a great credit to you.
However, I do feel that Brexit overwhelms everything, right now, and that is how it should be. A neuralgic and internal British political argument, debated for 50 years, is reaching its grand finale. What;s more, whatever happens to Brexit has massive, important lessons for half a billi
Compared to that, even the strangeness of America's new politics seems small beer, just right now.
Yeah, but nothing happens on Brexit Groundhog Day. Same old arguments and delusional ideas, few betting opportunities.
In America, Populism is about to die, and that is newsworthy, because where America goes, we follow.
Not that I'd characterise it as such but Brexit preceded Trump. There's a better argument to be made the other way round there.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
I agree, it is very possible that Brexit will kill populism in the UK, before Amy unseats Trump.
That's wishful thinking on your part.
If you're really interested in doing that then tackle the root causes.
That is why Brexit will fail. It will not address the root causes of discontent, indeed it will aggravate most of them.
It offers more direct control over migration by the UK Government and an end to EU federalisation. Those who advocate its reversal have nothing to say on either of those subjects other than to say they’ve proved their point.
They haven’t and, still more, still haven’t really understood or accepted its legitimacy in the first place so they can propose a credible solution.
Brexit might indeed offer more control on migration but since no-one in government or the wider Establishment has expressed the slightest desire actually to reduce immigration, what's the point?
The powers will be there. It’s up to the electors to exercise their vote accordingly if they wish the Government to use them.
Brexit might indeed offer more control on migration but since no-one in government or the wider Establishment has expressed the slightest desire actually to reduce immigration, what's the point?
There is a fundamental law.
If moderate politicians don't listen & fix things, then something worse comes along (see e.g., Italy).
That is why "populists" are growing in strength in Europe.
So how will she appeal to the rust belt and other parts of the US. Another West Coast liberal. Needs to pick her running mate carefully if she gets the nomination.
Klobuchar is raising real issues of interest to blue collar Americans. Definitely worth a punt.
So is anything actually happening about Brexit at the moment (apart from Theresa May trying to be all things to be all men, which can probably be taken as read)?
So how will she appeal to the rust belt and other parts of the US. Another West Coast liberal. Needs to pick her running mate carefully if she gets the nomination.
Personally view, incumbents lose reelection bids, rather than challengers win them.
Bush W lost because the US economy had just gone through a painful recession, and he'd raised taxes.
Carter lost because the US economy had just gone through a painful recession, and there had been a series of embarassing military setbacks.
Ford lost because the Republican Party was still reeling from the departure of both the previous Presient and Vice-President
etc.
If Trump is sufficiently unpopular with independents, or if the US economy weakens (especially in the rust belt), then it may not matter who his opponent is. (See Carter.)
Seems like a deliberately obtuse interpretation of the proposal frankly, if it is even viable. People all over this issue are so unreasonable you wonder why they are against a hard border at all, since they seem keen to object to anything but the status quo, ensuring they must get that hard border. The situation is changing and things need to be monitored, I get the bad blood between our nation's but monitoring at a border is not inherently disgraceful.
"since they seem keen to object to anything but the status quo"
"That is why "populists" are growing in strength in Europe."
You're not going to catch me, I know you're just teasing.
'Populists' support amoral policies which appeal to enough voters to get them elected whilst usually repulsing an equal number. Italy is a good example. Berlusconi was not what you call a populist whereas Salvini is though they are equally deplorable
So how will she appeal to the rust belt and other parts of the US. Another West Coast liberal. Needs to pick her running mate carefully if she gets the nomination.
Personally view, incumbents lose reelection bids, rather than challengers win them.
Bush W lost because the US economy had just gone through a painful recession, and he'd raised taxes.
Carter lost because the US economy had just gone through a painful recession, and there had been a series of embarassing military setbacks.
Ford lost because the Republican Party was still reeling from the departure of both the previous Presient and Vice-President
etc.
If Trump is sufficiently unpopular with independents, or if the US economy weakens (especially in the rust belt), then it may not matter who his opponent is. (See Carter.)
Have you seen Liam Fox's latest flag flying, Robert? Writing to each industry sector asking if an abolition of tariffs would harm them or not.
That is why Brexit will fail. It will not address the root causes of discontent, indeed it will aggravate most of them.
It offers more direct control over migration by the UK Government and an end to EU federalisation. Those who advocate its reversal have nothing to say on either of those subjects other than to say they’ve proved their point.
They haven’t and, still more, still haven’t really understood or accepted its legitimacy in the first place so they can propose a credible solution.
Brexit might indeed offer more control on migration but since no-one in government or the wider Establishment has expressed the slightest desire actually to reduce immigration, what's the point?
The powers will be there. It’s up to the electors to exercise their vote accordingly if they wish the Government to use them.
The powers were already there but look at the figures for non-EU immigration since 2010 under Conservative-led governments and Home Secretary Theresa hostile environment May.
The situation is actually even worse than that. As everyone knows, the UK and Switzerland announced an agreement to maintain a free trade agreement in a No Deal scenario. Unfortunately, the legal text of the proposed agreement still doesn't exist. The DfIT got the principle agreed, but hasn't actually done the hard work of getting an actual binding agreement drafted and signed.
It now looks next to impossible that this will be done by Brexit day.
Dr Liam Fox has been a disastrous cabinet minister. The history books will not be kind.
The situation is actually even worse than that. As everyone knows, the UK and Switzerland signed an agreement to maintain a free trade agreement in a No Deal scenario. Unfortunately, the legal text of the proposed agreement still doesn't exist. The DfIT got the principle agreed, but hasn't actually done the hard work of getting an actual agreement drafted and signed.
It now looks next to impossible that this will be done by Brexit day.
Dr Liam Fox has been a disastrous cabinet minister. The history books will not be kind.
If only someone had warned about appointing the disgraced national security risk Liam Fox to a key Brexit job.
Comments
Trying to track a Swedish birth certificate is tricky, appears to be born in Stockholm but has been a British subject.
Ain't life grand!
Oh, and you've missed SeanT's unfortunate wine.
I reckon that those tapestry workers couldn't do needlework quickly enough to catch all of the action.
The curriculum, that is, not the wine. And you are, of course, right about me missing the wine!
And I always find wine up the nose unpleasant. Much nicer to drink it through the ear holes.
(That last sentence was to demonstrate how most comments on exam reform by Gove and his apologists come across.)
https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar/status/1092859626406653953?s=19
Question 1: Were the British mad or just the posters on PB?
Question 2: Who was Theresa May and why is there no record of her elsewhere?
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/senator-klobuchar-to-announce-decision-on-2020-run-this-sunday-1437935683536
But yes, this person should be given some LEGO rather than words to work with.
(In any case, they seem to have lasted about five or six hours, which is not really 'nearly the whole day.' It's a bit like saying 'almost everyone voted Leave.')
Hosting the Oscars get the award. No-one wants to do it. So this year - there is no host.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47139123
Have a good morning.
On GCSE stuff.
I am curious: who writes this stuff? Teachers? Interns? YOP scheme kids?
Harris is clearly going to win this. One hopes.
Besides which I don't see the evidence that Populism is about to die in America. Not at all.
If ST has kept it for six months, it could easily be his fault, if he has kept it somewhere warm and standing up so the cork isn't kept moist.
https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/1093047323859578880
No wonder the penguins have all fled to the other side of the planet!
Not only will he never present anything ever again, but I don't think they will be satisfied unless this ends his whole career.
And I'm not sure they'll even be satisfied then.
Supermarkets sell wine far too young and I bet it was a 2015, a very closed vintage.
Corked wine is very rare. Much rarer than the supposed one in 12 urban myth.
If you're really interested in doing that then tackle the root causes.
https://twitter.com/amyklobuchar/status/1090953369332711426?s=19
It won't happen because the Irish border is about power politics and not finding a solution in good faith.
On the one hand they do indeed distort trade; while on the other hand destroying (mainly leaver?) manufacturing and agriculture is probably not what the burghers of Stoke were thinking.
Plus not a great augur for our free trade bargaining position.
Conversely Kamala Harris has to spend the best part of a year walking on a tightrope between blandness and divisiveness. Not easy either.
They haven’t and, still more, still haven’t really understood or accepted its legitimacy in the first place so they can propose a credible solution.
I only ask because I saw an article in the Guardian CiF discussing a statue to Mrs T in Grantham. It seems to me to be irrelevant (meh) but the assumption seems to be that it will be vandalised and it should be. Isn't that a populist reaction and bad?
Mind you, intolerance of a statue just seems barmy.
How do you define 'populist'? Does it have to be right-wing?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/06/labour-tolerate-foreign-socialist-abuses-thornberry-venezuela-nicolas-maduro
It works for me.
If moderate politicians don't listen & fix things, then something worse comes along (see e.g., Italy).
That is why "populists" are growing in strength in Europe.
As you use the word, populist, would you like to define it? Does someone winning an election have to be populist?
"That is why "populists" are growing in strength in Europe."
You're not going to catch me, I know you're just teasing.
Obviously designed to sound good and dupe the plebs .
-4.3% from November 2018
-2.1% from December 2017
https://www.destatis.de/EN/PressServices/Press/pr/2019/01/PE19_035_45212.html
Today we get Germany's December manufacturing orders:
-1.6% from November 2018
-7.0% from December 2017
https://www.destatis.de/EN/PressServices/Press/pr/2019/02/PE19_042_421.html
Now perhaps things get reversed in the new year but if they don't ...
Bush W lost because the US economy had just gone through a painful recession, and he'd raised taxes.
Carter lost because the US economy had just gone through a painful recession, and there had been a series of embarassing military setbacks.
Ford lost because the Republican Party was still reeling from the departure of both the previous Presient and Vice-President
etc.
If Trump is sufficiently unpopular with independents, or if the US economy weakens (especially in the rust belt), then it may not matter who his opponent is. (See Carter.)
ie what Theresa May promised.
Ceramics on R4 this morning saying it would.
Minford Victorius are we really going there?
Five history books? Which ones? VM me if you want.
It now looks next to impossible that this will be done by Brexit day.
Dr Liam Fox has been a disastrous cabinet minister. The history books will not be kind.
https://twitter.com/peddersophie/status/1093063510869897217?s=21