Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
There seems to be a consensus on here at least. Corbyn has soiled himself over Brexit and I cant see him recovering. His 300,000 storm troopers are more dedicated to Remaining than to him. Thornberry is an excellent alternative. She'll keep the 300,000 on board but with a much wider appeal among neutrals. More important she's witty and feisty. An irresistible combination
Interesting to see in the YouGov breakdown that the North is now 48% wrong to leave, 39% right to leave. It suggests Corbyn's fear of getting mullered in northern constituencies if he supports Remain/2nd Ref might be misplaced.
Funnily enough, if a cross party Brexit did pass more akin to Labour's tastes, I'd expect those numbers to change.
Can anyone explain what's happening with May's visit to Europe today? I've read news articles stating that the EU chiefs have responded by ruling out any legally binding changes, and read other articles stating that the EU have opened the door to legally binding changes which will be determined by end of February.
What's really going on?
There will be changes but they're fucking annoyed about it and venting their spleen as a consequence whilst turning up the europhile rhetoric to eleven, as cover.
At least that'd be my guess based on the latest information.
On topic: There seems to be an anomaly in the betting on Kasich which perhaps someone can explain.
As Republican nominee, Kasich is fourth favourite after Trump, Haley and Pence and ahead of Romney and Ryan. He comes into his own if a) Trump decides not to run (30% chance?) and b) the Democrats put up a left winger (50% chance?) Then Kasich might be chosen by mainstream Republicans who wouldn't countenance Pence and could see Kasich attracting independents (and Ohio swing voters).
He last traded at 26 for the nomination which I think is fair value - perhaps a little long.
So why is he 140 for the presidency? That makes no sense. If he is chosen as nominee that means that the Republicans think he has a good chance of beating his left-wing Democrat opponent. His odds as president should be no more than say 1.5 times his odds as nominee.
Is my analysis wrong or is his presidency bet a steal?
Can anyone explain what's happening with May's visit to Europe today? I've read news articles stating that the EU chiefs have responded by ruling out any legally binding changes, and read other articles stating that the EU have opened the door to legally binding changes which will be determined by end of February.
What's really going on?
There will be changes but they're fucking annoyed about it and venting their spleen as a consequence whilst turning up the europhile rhetoric to eleven, as cover.
At least that'd be my guess based on the latest information.
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
It is a bizarre habit. Sometimes 'twitter reacts' is itself the headline story
And then everyone reacts to those reactions. It really has a terrible effect on public policy in almost all regards.
The phrases to look out for are “took to social media to...” and “gone viral”. These are basically a trump card over any sense of judging a story by usual means
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
Can anyone explain what's happening with May's visit to Europe today? I've read news articles stating that the EU chiefs have responded by ruling out any legally binding changes, and read other articles stating that the EU have opened the door to legally binding changes which will be determined by end of February.
What's really going on?
There will be changes but they're fucking annoyed about it and venting their spleen as a consequence whilst turning up the europhile rhetoric to eleven, as cover.
At least that'd be my guess based on the latest information.
If so that seems like good news?
Yes, but no evidence for it yet. Just straws in the wind.
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
To state the obvious, it's classic confirmation bias.
On a side note, I thought it was ridiculous that the Guardian added "[sic]" after what are clearly examples of American spelling standards. I don't like them either, but pretending that they're somehow errors by the brand is utterly uncalled for.
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
It’s cheap and fills dead air time/paper. Equally TV loves getting comments from the sort of public that are hanging around regional market square in the mid morning. It’s equally non-illuminating and equally filler.
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
It is a bizarre habit. Sometimes 'twitter reacts' is itself the headline story
And then everyone reacts to those reactions. It really has a terrible effect on public policy in almost all regards.
The phrases to look out for are “took to social media to...” and “gone viral”. These are basically a trump card over any sense of judging a story by usual means
Social media rewards those who provide the most fluent echo chamber for followers who already agree with them. Unless you're a very major, and disciplined, public character there's no other way to gain lots of followers. The most interesting and objective people on Twitter have far fewer followers, I find.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Well it is remain without the benefits. No point we may as well stay in that scenario
Leaving is important in itself because of the referendum mandate. if we fail to leave the two truly significant lessons of this horrendous exercise won't ever come home. Firstly that you can't deal with issues of national identity and sovereignty without genuine and wholehearted consent (the 1972-2016 problem); secondly that policy and politics is a tough activity needing grown up thinking (the problem of simplistic campaigns over complex issues).
Just as a thought exercise: If the Scots had voted for independence, what sorts of horrific and insoluble complexities would have been discovered lurking under the floorboards...
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
It is a bizarre habit. Sometimes 'twitter reacts' is itself the headline story
And then everyone reacts to those reactions. It really has a terrible effect on public policy in almost all regards.
One of David Cameron's better attributes was that he was incredibly good at balanced responses in the face of Twitter lynch mobs. I imagine any future Labour government will have immense difficulty operating under those circumstances, especially given recent changes to afford the members more power.
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
It’s cheap and fills dead air time/paper. Equally TV loves getting comments from the sort of public that are hanging around regional market square in the mid morning. It’s equally non-illuminating and equally filler.
What sort of cowboy operators do the upgrade of the comment system of world class websites?
Mumsnet has reported itself to the information commissioner after a data breach resulted in users accidentally logging into the accounts of strangers.
A botched upgrade to the software the forum runs on meant that for three days, if two users tried to log in at the same time, there was the possibility that their accounts would be switched. Each user was able to post as the other, see their account details, and read private messages.
The company doesn’t know how many user accounts were affected, but says that over the three days the bug was live, from Tuesday afternoon to Thursday morning, about 4,000 users logged in. Of that, only 14 users have reported an issue.
Mumsnet founder Justine Roberts apologised to users in a post, saying: “You’ve every right to expect your Mumsnet account to be secure and private. We are working urgently to discover exactly how this breach happened and to learn and improve our processes. We will also keep you informed about what is happening. We will of course be reporting this incident to the information commissioner.”
Mumsnet confirmed to the Guardian that it has now self-referred to the Information Commissioners Office, as it is legally required to do in the event of a data breach.
I can't begin to imagine the monstrosity they must have jerry-rigged behind the scenes for that bug to be possible.
I can.
It's almost certainly a threading issue. The server will be serving multiple users at once. If the forum software isn't 100% thread-safe, then it's plausible that the user credentials from one thread will get swapped/overwrite another. An absolutely trivial bug and one that's very difficult to nail down.
I've seen this happen twice in the wild with Rack on Ruby, which is a pretty bullet-proof piece of software. (In one case it was forum developer error, but in another it appears to have been a genuine bug in the Passenger application server.)
And if it can happen with Rack, it can certainly happen in whatever PHP monstrosity Mumsnet uses. (I don't know for sure that Mumsnet is coded in PHP, but frankly it's that kind of place. Unfortunately when I googled "mumsnet backend" the first result was a thread called "Dog licking her back end", which I could have done without.)
On topic: There seems to be an anomaly in the betting on Kasich which perhaps someone can explain.
As Republican nominee, Kasich is fourth favourite after Trump, Haley and Pence and ahead of Romney and Ryan. He comes into his own if a) Trump decides not to run (30% chance?) and b) the Democrats put up a left winger (50% chance?) Then Kasich might be chosen by mainstream Republicans who wouldn't countenance Pence and could see Kasich attracting independents (and Ohio swing voters).
He last traded at 26 for the nomination which I think is fair value - perhaps a little long.
So why is he 140 for the presidency? That makes no sense. If he is chosen as nominee that means that the Republicans think he has a good chance of beating his left-wing Democrat opponent. His odds as president should be no more than say 1.5 times his odds as nominee.
Is my analysis wrong or is his presidency bet a steal?
No, to the latter. 26 for the nomination is far too short.
The polls are far from clear at present - Yougov and Opinium have the Tories clearly ahead whilst Ipsos Mori and Survation have the main parties level pegging.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Well it is remain without the benefits. No point we may as well stay in that scenario
Well yes, I’d prefer to remain but I assume that bird has flown
The polls are far from clear at present - Yougov and Opinium have the Tories clearly ahead whilst Ipsos Mori and Survation have the main parties level pegging.
They're not only not clear, they're meaningless, and will remain so until there is some clarity over Brexit.
What sort of cowboy operators do the upgrade of the comment system of world class websites?
Mumsnet has reported itself to the information commissioner after a data breach resulted in users accidentally logging into the accounts of strangers.
A botched upgrade to the software the forum runs on meant that for three days, if two users tried to log in at the same time, there was the possibility that their accounts would be switched. Each user was able to post as the other, see their account details, and read private messages.
The company doesn’t know how many user accounts were affected, but says that over the three days the bug was live, from Tuesday afternoon to Thursday morning, about 4,000 users logged in. Of that, only 14 users have reported an issue.
Mumsnet founder Justine Roberts apologised to users in a post, saying: “You’ve every right to expect your Mumsnet account to be secure and private. We are working urgently to discover exactly how this breach happened and to learn and improve our processes. We will also keep you informed about what is happening. We will of course be reporting this incident to the information commissioner.”
Mumsnet confirmed to the Guardian that it has now self-referred to the Information Commissioners Office, as it is legally required to do in the event of a data breach.
I can't begin to imagine the monstrosity they must have jerry-rigged behind the scenes for that bug to be possible.
I can.
It's almost certainly a threading issue. The server will be serving multiple users at once. If the forum software isn't 100% thread-safe, then it's plausible that the user credentials from one thread will get swapped/overwrite another. An absolutely trivial bug and one that's very difficult to nail down.
I've seen this happen twice in the wild with Rack on Ruby, which is a pretty bullet-proof piece of software. (In one case it was forum developer error, but in another it appears to have been a genuine bug in the Passenger application server.)
And if it can happen with Rack, it can certainly happen in whatever PHP monstrosity Mumsnet uses. (I don't know for sure that Mumsnet is coded in PHP, but frankly it's that kind of place. Unfortunately when I googled "mumsnet backend" the first result was a thread called "Dog licking her back end", which I could have done without.)
I suspect it's the same bug that you found as my quick look at Mumsnet tells me it runs on Ruby using Phusion Passenger albeit with cloudflare caching.
The polls are far from clear at present - Yougov and Opinium have the Tories clearly ahead whilst Ipsos Mori and Survation have the main parties level pegging.
They're not only not clear, they're meaningless, and will remain so until there is some clarity over Brexit.
What are your thoughts on the UK racing stoppage? One or two are saying the BHA has over-reacted but if there is a new strain of equine flu out and about I don't know what else they can do.
I don’t really buy that it is racist, but what absolute twat would buy such an item of clothing.
I don't know why the BBC and Guardian keeping reporting and requoting the loudmouth morons on Twitter as if they're somehow representative.
It’s cheap and fills dead air time/paper. Equally TV loves getting comments from the sort of public that are hanging around regional market square in the mid morning. It’s equally non-illuminating and equally filler.
True. Most journalists are both skint and lazy.
It’s a more recent interation of the much of Monday newspapers and their “a report today” churnalism, “a report by the Association of British Lavatory Consumable Suppliers revealed that majority of the public prefer to wipe with Andrex and not nettles”.
On topic: There seems to be an anomaly in the betting on Kasich which perhaps someone can explain.
As Republican nominee, Kasich is fourth favourite after Trump, Haley and Pence and ahead of Romney and Ryan. He comes into his own if a) Trump decides not to run (30% chance?) and b) the Democrats put up a left winger (50% chance?) Then Kasich might be chosen by mainstream Republicans who wouldn't countenance Pence and could see Kasich attracting independents (and Ohio swing voters).
He last traded at 26 for the nomination which I think is fair value - perhaps a little long.
So why is he 140 for the presidency? That makes no sense. If he is chosen as nominee that means that the Republicans think he has a good chance of beating his left-wing Democrat opponent. His odds as president should be no more than say 1.5 times his odds as nominee.
Is my analysis wrong or is his presidency bet a steal?
No, to the latter. 26 for the nomination is far too short.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
It doesn't meet May's red lines and would destroy the tory party, therefore it will not happen.
I suspect it's the same bug that you found as my quick look at Mumsnet tells me it runs on Ruby using Phusion Passenger albeit with cloudflare caching.
Wow. In that case: certain versions of Passenger (with Apache, don't know about nginx) b0rk out if you don't send a Content-Length header. I think there's some kind of buffer overrun, but haven't looked into it in any more detail.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
On topic: There seems to be an anomaly in the betting on Kasich which perhaps someone can explain.
As Republican nominee, Kasich is fourth favourite after Trump, Haley and Pence and ahead of Romney and Ryan. He comes into his own if a) Trump decides not to run (30% chance?) and b) the Democrats put up a left winger (50% chance?) Then Kasich might be chosen by mainstream Republicans who wouldn't countenance Pence and could see Kasich attracting independents (and Ohio swing voters).
He last traded at 26 for the nomination which I think is fair value - perhaps a little long.
So why is he 140 for the presidency? That makes no sense. If he is chosen as nominee that means that the Republicans think he has a good chance of beating his left-wing Democrat opponent. His odds as president should be no more than say 1.5 times his odds as nominee.
Is my analysis wrong or is his presidency bet a steal?
No, to the latter. 26 for the nomination is far too short.
It's a betting opportunity either way.
Yes, there's an inconsistency there but you have to figure which way it is. Personally I'd say the 140 is too long because if he did win the nomination his chances of going all the way would be better than most of the potential Republican nominees.
I suspect it's the same bug that you found as my quick look at Mumsnet tells me it runs on Ruby using Phusion Passenger albeit with cloudflare caching.
Wow. In that case: certain versions of Passenger (with Apache, don't know about nginx) b0rk out if you don't send a Content-Length header. I think there's some kind of buffer overrun, but haven't looked into it in any more detail.
It’s a more recent interation of the much of Monday newspapers and their “a report today” churnalism, “a report by the Association of British Lavatory Consumable Suppliers revealed that majority of the public prefer to wipe with Andrex and not nettles”.
That is the journalistic sin that annoys me the most. I must have heard literally hundreds, maybe even thousands, of stories where the blindingly obvious bias of the entity responsible for the press release — usually with some dubious claim or stat* — has gone uncommented on.
The press love to run such stories if it bashes the government (of any colour) or has some "the world is going to Hell in a handcart" point to cheer us all up.
I would estimate that 90% of such stories shouldn't get any airtime, as they are mostly nonsense.
* In many cases almost certainly voodoo polls of self-selecting members or users.
I wonder if this could finally be the trigger for a split in the Labour party.
If so I'm with the Yvette party. If she were leader I could break the habit of a lifetime and vote Labour
Not after you had had to watch multiple vacuous statements from her with the accompanied pained looked as if it hurts to speak. Reminds me of a 5 year old on the toilet with constipation.
I suspect it's the same bug that you found as my quick look at Mumsnet tells me it runs on Ruby using Phusion Passenger albeit with cloudflare caching.
Wow. In that case: certain versions of Passenger (with Apache, don't know about nginx) b0rk out if you don't send a Content-Length header. I think there's some kind of buffer overrun, but haven't looked into it in any more detail.
Splendid. Ruby is a Japanese project (with the rather wonderful guiding development principle MINSWAN: Matz [the creator] Is Nice So We Are Nice). But if I understood any Chinese...
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
I suspect it's the same bug that you found as my quick look at Mumsnet tells me it runs on Ruby using Phusion Passenger albeit with cloudflare caching.
Wow. In that case: certain versions of Passenger (with Apache, don't know about nginx) b0rk out if you don't send a Content-Length header. I think there's some kind of buffer overrun, but haven't looked into it in any more detail.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which politician should have been played by Patricia Routledge?
What special place in EU heaven is reserved for those who sold remaining in the EU in the referendum without once mentioning "ever closer union", the only truth of the EU?
What special place in EU heaven is reserved for those who sold remaining in the EU in the referendum without once mentioning "ever closer union", the only truth of the EU?
An opt-out was one of the most prominent aspects of what Cameron was proposing. Surprised you missed it...
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which politician should have been played by Patricia Routledge?
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
Eastern Europe is growing strongly, likely to continue to catch up with Western Europe. Our East European diaspora is likely to be a particularly important segment of our economy, if we retain close trading links. Nice to see Greece recovering well too.
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
Eastern Europe is growing strongly, likely to continue to catch up with Western Europe. Our East European diaspora is likely to be a particularly important segment of our economy, if we retain close trading links. Nice to see Greece recovering well too.
These figures don't really support @stodge's theory that the single market only benefits Germany and the South-East of England...
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
What special place in EU heaven is reserved for those who sold remaining in the EU in the referendum without once mentioning "ever closer union", the only truth of the EU?
An opt-out was one of the most prominent aspects of what Cameron was proposing. Surprised you missed it...
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
You do realise that Malta has based its economy around tax competition and pass-through business, yes? It’s also an overpopulated dump.
What special place in EU heaven is reserved for those who sold remaining in the EU in the referendum without once mentioning "ever closer union", the only truth of the EU?
An opt-out was one of the most prominent aspects of what Cameron was proposing. Surprised you missed it...
Luckily useful idiots campaigned to Leave instead, so that pledge was able to be torn up.
HIs opt out was meaningless and not worth the paper it was scribbled on.
Perhaps, but one thing's for sure: if we'd have taken him up on the offer, we'd have spent a lot less time talking about Europe over the last two years.
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
Eastern Europe is growing strongly, likely to continue to catch up with Western Europe. Our East European diaspora is likely to be a particularly important segment of our economy, if we retain close trading links. Nice to see Greece recovering well too.
These figures don't really support @stodge's theory that the single market only benefits Germany and the South-East of England...
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
Tntly agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
Nobody's immune, Casino, but I'm trying my best.
Let me ask you this. Imagine the can has been kicked down to the end of the road and we are facing a No Deal exit tomorrow. All other possibilities have been exhausted except that one and Revoke. (Assume for the purposes of this hypothetical but by no means implausible scenario that the PM can still write a letter which revokes A50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
Eastern Europe is growing strongly, likely to continue to catch up with Western Europe. Our East European diaspora is likely to be a particularly important segment of our economy, if we retain close trading links. Nice to see Greece recovering well too.
The ethos of the EU; The bigger economies help lift the smaller ones for everyone's long term benefit. How were they to know the UK didn't like sharing a little for the benefit of all?
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which Labour Politician does Sean T have lurid sexual thoughts about?
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
Tntly agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
Nobody's immune, Casino, but I'm trying my best.
Let me ask you this. Imagine the can has been kicked down to the end of the road and we are facing a No Deal exit tomorrow. All other possibilities have been exhausted except that one and Revoke. (Assume for the purposes of this hypothetical but by no means implausible scenario that the PM can still write a letter which revokes A50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
One thing we're already starting to see is Brexiteers proposing revocation as a way to escape the 'trap' of Article 50. With the right framing, it could be surprisingly popular across the spectrum.
That's very interesting. Malta top. I'm not really surprised. They embrace immigrants and it has a definite socialist feel to it. Very cheap public transport and utility bills are subsidised.
Eastern Europe is growing strongly, likely to continue to catch up with Western Europe. Our East European diaspora is likely to be a particularly important segment of our economy, if we retain close trading links. Nice to see Greece recovering well too.
The ethos of the EU; The bigger economies help lift the smaller ones for everyone's long term benefit. How were they to know the UK didn't like sharing a little for the benefit of all?
Yes, I for one am very happy with the efforts we made in the last 30 years to bring back Eastern Europe into the mainstream of European Democracy and Economic Liberalism. Certainly still some way to go, but the contributions of our leadership of the EU in this project is something to be rightly proud of.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
Tntly agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
Nobody's immune, Casino, but I'm trying my best.
Let me ask you this. Imagine the can has been kicked down to the end of the road and we are facing a No Deal exit tomorrow. All other possibilities have been exhausted except that one and Revoke. (Assume for the purposes of this hypothetical but by no means implausible scenario that the PM can still write a letter which revokes A50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
If it got to that stage, and May was still in office? 4/1. A 2-3 month delay? Odds on. I'd say 4/6. I think she's serious.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which Labour Politician does Sean T have lurid sexual thoughts about?
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which Labour Politician does Sean T have lurid sexual thoughts about?
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which Labour Politician does Sean T have lurid sexual thoughts about?
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
Nobody's immune, Casino, but I'm trying my best.
Let me ask you this. Imagine the can has been kicked down to the end of the road and we are facing a No Deal exit tomorrow. All other possibilities have been exhausted except that one and Revoke. (Assume for the purposes of this hypothetical but by no means implausible scenario that the PM can still write a letter which revokes A50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
One thing we're already starting to see is Brexiteers proposing revocation as a way to escape the 'trap' of Article 50. With the right framing, it could be surprisingly popular across the spectrum.
Frankly, William, I think we are in deep shit whatever we do now. I certainly don't think Revoke is an easy answer, whatever side of the divide one might be on.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which Labour Politician does Sean T have lurid sexual thoughts about?
He's never said, has he? Must be The Beast Of Bolsover though.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which Labour Politician does Sean T have lurid sexual thoughts about?
Shami Chakrabarti.
I've read "Kissing England"...
Mr T posted about his Ms Thornberry fantasies last night
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
Tntly agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?e.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
Nobody's immune, Casino, but I'm trying my best.
Let me ask you this. Imagine the can has been kicked down to the end of the road and we are facing a No Deal exit tomorrow. All other possibilities have been exhausted except that one and Revoke. (Assume for the purposes of this hypothetical but by no means implausible scenario that the PM can still write a letter which revokes A50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
If it got to that stage, and May was still in office? 4/1. A 2-3 month delay? Odds on. I'd say 4/6. I think she's serious.
Might even be 5/1.
May is like a limpet once she sticks to a policy.
I know it may be 7/1 or 8/1 now but you did say the scenario was one minute to midnight.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
One thing we're already starting to see is Brexiteers proposing revocation as a way to escape the 'trap' of Article 50. With the right framing, it could be surprisingly popular across the spectrum.
Frankly, William, I think we are in deep shit whatever we do now. I certainly don't think Revoke is an easy answer, whatever side of the divide one might be on.
The EU could probably end this now by putting Cameron's deal back on the table in a draft treaty with a promise to look at reform of free movement in future, with some political guidelines appended to it, and to say all sides had learned lessons from this.
But, that's never going to happen. They're far too myopic and inflexible.
Corbyn's 19% rating must be a concern for Labour strategists.
Masterful understatement. The last thing we need is for Brexit to get even more complicated but as soon as that is out of the way he really needs to stand down and let Emily Thornberry take over.
If Thornberry is the answer, you have to wonder what the heck is the question.
Which politician should have been played by Patricia Routledge?
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
One thing we're already starting to see is Brexiteers proposing revocation as a way to escape the 'trap' of Article 50. With the right framing, it could be surprisingly popular across the spectrum.
Frankly, William, I think we are in deep shit whatever we do now. I certainly don't think Revoke is an easy answer, whatever side of the divide one might be on.
The EU could probably end this now by putting Cameron's deal back on the table in a draft treaty with a promise to look at reform of free movement in future, with some political guidelines appended to it, and to say all sides had learned lessons from this.
But, that's never going to happen. They're far too myopic and inflexible.
Interesting news from Brussels - the EU says Labour’s policy could offer a route out of the impasse. Permanent Customs Union would be a gigantic relief for our business, and many others.
Let’s do it.
Tusk saying that has probably just reduced its chances.
The more opportunity Theresa May is given to diddle about and keep running down the clock, the less likely anything other than her Withdrawal Agreement or Hard Brexit becomes. There's no prospect of Labour's demands getting a look in unless or until a sufficiently large bloc of Tory defectors crosses the floor to embrace it.
Tntly agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
She doesn't need a majority to revoke.
I think she does.
But even if she did not, why would she?
Does she, Sean? I don't think so. She could just write a letter, no?e.
That's confirmation bias, Peter, based on what you want to happen. It's not value.
Nobody's immune, Casino, but I'm trying my best.
Let50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
If it got to that stage, and May was still in office? 4/1. A 2-3 month delay? Odds on. I'd say 4/6. I think she's serious.
Might even be 5/1.
May is like a limpet once she sticks to a policy.
I know it may be 7/1 or 8/1 now but you did say the scenario was one minute to midnight.
She would can kick.
Well I was trying to simplify the situation as much as possible, and the reality is never likely to be that simple. Yes, in practice I guess she'd find a way to kick the can again, but let's say it really came down to Revoke or No Deal.
Personally I'd make it 8/11 Revoke if the only other runner was ND. And I really am wearing my punter's hat here, or trying to.
Comments
I've been laying her heavily.
It's just as likely we return to a formalised associate member status, not full membership.
Let's wait and see.
At least that'd be my guess based on the latest information.
It really has a terrible effect on public policy in almost all regards.
As Republican nominee, Kasich is fourth favourite after Trump, Haley and Pence and ahead of Romney and Ryan. He comes into his own if a) Trump decides not to run (30% chance?) and b) the Democrats put up a left winger (50% chance?) Then Kasich might be chosen by mainstream Republicans who wouldn't countenance Pence and could see Kasich attracting independents (and Ohio swing voters).
He last traded at 26 for the nomination which I think is fair value - perhaps a little long.
So why is he 140 for the presidency? That makes no sense. If he is chosen as nominee that means that the Republicans think he has a good chance of beating his left-wing Democrat opponent. His odds as president should be no more than say 1.5 times his odds as nominee.
Is my analysis wrong or is his presidency bet a steal?
To be frank I thought that the hardcore Conservative Remainers would jump ship as soon as it became obvious, following her response to the Parliamentary defeat of the Deal, that there was no significant likelihood of ever getting a second referendum out of the Prime Minister. Yet as of this moment they remain miserably huddled on the Government benches whilst Labour appears rather more fissiparous than the Tories.
It is worth remembering at this juncture that the count of departed or expelled MPs in this Parliament presently stands at Labour 6, Conservative 0 and that, however many of Theresa May's MPs might think she's useless, only on Corbyn's side do some of his colleagues take exception to his leadership on the grounds of morality.
At the end of the day, only two outcomes seem likely - either sufficient consensus builds around the Withdrawal Agreement (whether exactly as presently agreed, or with some tweaks to try to make it more palatable) and it makes it onto the statute book, or Parliament continues to decline to vote for it and No Deal happens. Where does the necessary majority of votes come from for anything else?
On a side note, I thought it was ridiculous that the Guardian added "[sic]" after what are clearly examples of American spelling standards. I don't like them either, but pretending that they're somehow errors by the brand is utterly uncalled for.
Unless you're a very major, and disciplined, public character there's no other way to gain lots of followers.
The most interesting and objective people on Twitter have far fewer followers, I find.
Leaving is important in itself because of the referendum mandate. if we fail to leave the two truly significant lessons of this horrendous exercise won't ever come home. Firstly that you can't deal with issues of national identity and sovereignty without genuine and wholehearted consent (the 1972-2016 problem); secondly that policy and politics is a tough activity needing grown up thinking (the problem of simplistic campaigns over complex issues).
Just as a thought exercise: If the Scots had voted for independence, what sorts of horrific and insoluble complexities would have been discovered lurking under the floorboards...
It's almost certainly a threading issue. The server will be serving multiple users at once. If the forum software isn't 100% thread-safe, then it's plausible that the user credentials from one thread will get swapped/overwrite another. An absolutely trivial bug and one that's very difficult to nail down.
I've seen this happen twice in the wild with Rack on Ruby, which is a pretty bullet-proof piece of software. (In one case it was forum developer error, but in another it appears to have been a genuine bug in the Passenger application server.)
And if it can happen with Rack, it can certainly happen in whatever PHP monstrosity Mumsnet uses. (I don't know for sure that Mumsnet is coded in PHP, but frankly it's that kind of place. Unfortunately when I googled "mumsnet backend" the first result was a thread called "Dog licking her back end", which I could have done without.)
https://twitter.com/YvetteCooperMP/status/1093571423661105152
I wonder if this could finally be the trigger for a split in the Labour party.
🌜🌞🌎🔥🍸
🍺🍺🍺🍺
If so I'm with the Yvette party. If she were leader I could break the habit of a lifetime and vote Labour
But even if she did not, why would she?
The Tory lead over Labour has extended to 1.5% and the Tories are 19 short of a majority (they've gained another seat off Labour).
This is the Chinese version if it helps.
The press love to run such stories if it bashes the government (of any colour) or has some "the world is going to Hell in a handcart" point to cheer us all up.
I would estimate that 90% of such stories shouldn't get any airtime, as they are mostly nonsense.
* In many cases almost certainly voodoo polls of self-selecting members or users.
Reminds me of a 5 year old on the toilet with constipation.
Why would she? Well, if I were in her shoes and I had to make the dreadful choice between No Deal or Revoke, I'd choose the latter. Marginal choice, it's true, but on balance I'd figure the long-term damage to the Country, Party and my own reputation would be less.
I know you don't share that view, and you are by no means alone, but I'm trying to look at impartially. From a betting viewpoint, I'd certainly think that option should be less the 7/1 currnetly available.
Recipies for Brexit Britain:
https://www.britishcouncil.org/organisation/policy-insight-research/defence-english-cooking
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1093605316439138304
Even with Brexit the UK economy will probably grow better than elsewhere in Europe..
In the general election Biden leads Trump 51% to 49% in Iowa but Trump leads Harris 53% to 47%, Sanders 51% to 50%, Warren 52% to 48%
https://www.emerson.edu/news-events/emerson-college-today-unpublished/iowa-poll-one-year-out-caucus-biden-leads-democratic-field-third-party-candidacy-helps-trump
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1093516463103606784?s=19
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pms-statement-following-european-council-meeting-19-february-2016
Luckily useful idiots campaigned to Leave instead, so that pledge was able to be torn up.
It's not value.
https://twitter.com/EU_Commission/status/1093454719366909952?s=19
Let me ask you this. Imagine the can has been kicked down to the end of the road and we are facing a No Deal exit tomorrow. All other possibilities have been exhausted except that one and Revoke. (Assume for the purposes of this hypothetical but by no means implausible scenario that the PM can still write a letter which revokes A50.) You are a bookie. It's a two-horse race. What odds are you going?
I'm not trying to trick you into a bet here, and I wouldn't bet on this one anyway. Too many imponderables. But if it were such a two-horse race, I know what my odds would be. You want to tell me yours, or shall I go first?
I think she's serious.
I've read "Kissing England"...
https://twitter.com/therollerdisco/status/1093523936460066816
May is like a limpet once she sticks to a policy.
I know it may be 7/1 or 8/1 now but you did say the scenario was one minute to midnight.
She would can kick.
But, that's never going to happen. They're far too myopic and inflexible.
Personally I'd make it 8/11 Revoke if the only other runner was ND. And I really am wearing my punter's hat here, or trying to.