Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Do Farage’s claims about 100k people signing up for his new pa

24

Comments

  • Options

    MaxPB said:

    Jonathan said:

    MaxPB said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    We'll be a second rate global power rather than 1/28th of a second rate global power.
    Technically in your model we are currently 1 + 1/28 of a second rate power, so still better.
    While in the EU we have no voice, just 1/28th of a voice.
    How did we manage to invade Iraq against the will of France and Germany?
    Let alone Merthyr Tydfil!
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,963

    kyf_100 said:

    The death cult is in full song tonight. Leave won when affluent reactionaries decided that their hatred of the EU justified race-baiting.

    Leave won when Merkel decided that anybody who wanted to come to the EU could come to Germany, then once they were there, they could go anywhere they wanted in the EU.

    The day I have the ability to vote Merkel out for that decision is the day the EU becomes remotely democratic. Until then, all I hear from you is the same tired old argument about it in some way being racist to want to have control over your own borders.
    It’s racist to whip up untrue fears of millions of Muslims being poised to descend on Britain to win votes. But the affluent reactionaries decided that was worth it to indulge their anti-EU prejudice.
    The trend is your friend.

    http://www.pewforum.org/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,879
    edited February 2019
    kyf_100 said:

    Yes, we're a second rate power. No delusions of imperial grandeur here.

    But the EU "deal" made it very, very clear that from within the EU we had about the same power as Merthyr Tydfil has by being part of the UK.

    Better to be an independent nation making its own choices than a minor province which has devolved its decision making powers to somewhere else.

    I'm not sure I'm following this simile correctly, but you're saying that Merthyr Tydfil should vote to Leave the UK, right?

    I mean, the pizza restaurant there is quite nice and the Taff Trail is fun, but I doubt it has a viable economic future outside the UK. I'm not even convinced it has one within it.

    Meanwhile

    https://twitter.com/youngvulgarian/status/1097233443291828224
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    edited February 2019
    The UK could have had Tobias Ellwood a Defence Minister as Defence Secretary but May decided to put the imbecile Williamson in that role .

    I don’t vote Tory but Ellwood looks like a decent guy and at least has been in the army . He also has said this evening he’d resign if MPs weren’t offered a free vote on the Cooper amendment .
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,176
    viewcode said:

    @geoffw

    Ok, I am now on another train and so can continue the convo from downthread. Yes, the point one needs to comprehend is that the aim is to get a plurality in a seat, not a majority. The fact that seat-x voted 60/40 in terms of Leave is not relevant in itself, it's a question of how cohesive the votes are: if you can get all the Remain votes but the Leave votes are distributed amongst two or more parties, then you may win 40/30/30. In the specific instance of Labour Leave, there's little point in aiming for the Leave vote if you can't compete (if Labour, Con and Ukip are all competing for Leave votes, it's difficult to see Lab winning) and/or you lose more Remain votes than you gain Leave votes.

    If Labour could arrange a by-election in a majority Leave constituency, it would be interesting to see them put this to the test and stand an avowedly Leave candidate, see if his vote went down or up

    I don't dispute any of this. I only want to flag up a very useful new piece of analysis.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,691
    nico67 said:

    The UK could have had Tobias Ellwood a Defence Minister as Defence Secretary but May decided to put the imbecile Williamson in that role .

    I don’t vote Tory but Ellwood looks like a decent guy and at least has been in the army . He also has said this evening he’d resign if MPs weren’t offered a free vote on the Cooper amendment .

    As I remember it, it was Williamson who decided to put prize pillock Williamson in the role.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,373
    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    For me it was Merkel, Merkel, Merkel. She refused the emergency brake that Cameron needed, she drove the Euro to the precipice with her Bankers take the strain policy, she almost lost Greece as a member, she really screwed up the immigration crisis, she just about brought Turkey into the EU, she insisted on mandatory quotas, she played a major role in insisting that the WA had to be settled before we discussed important stuff like our future relationship, she has run an austerity program reducing domestic demand when her government has a huge surplus and a ridiculous trade surplus with the other Eurozone countries.

    Not all of that was covered in the documentaries but there was enough to see that she has never found an EU crisis that she could not make worse. Total disaster for the continent.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,691
    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    For me it was Merkel, Merkel, Merkel. She refused the emergency brake that Cameron needed, she drove the Euro to the precipice with her Bankers take the strain policy, she almost lost Greece as a member, she really screwed up the immigration crisis, she just about brought Turkey into the EU, she insisted on mandatory quotas, she played a major role in insisting that the WA had to be settled before we discussed important stuff like our future relationship, she has run an austerity program reducing domestic demand when her government has a huge surplus and a ridiculous trade surplus with the other Eurozone countries.

    Not all of that was covered in the documentaries but there was enough to see that she has never found an EU crisis that she could not make worse. Total disaster for the continent.
    Tsipras thought that Merkel would come good and cut a deal with him. She hung him out to dry.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,373

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    For me it was Merkel, Merkel, Merkel. She refused the emergency brake that Cameron needed, she drove the Euro to the precipice with her Bankers take the strain policy, she almost lost Greece as a member, she really screwed up the immigration crisis, she just about brought Turkey into the EU, she insisted on mandatory quotas, she played a major role in insisting that the WA had to be settled before we discussed important stuff like our future relationship, she has run an austerity program reducing domestic demand when her government has a huge surplus and a ridiculous trade surplus with the other Eurozone countries.

    Not all of that was covered in the documentaries but there was enough to see that she has never found an EU crisis that she could not make worse. Total disaster for the continent.
    Tsipras thought that Merkel would come good and cut a deal with him. She hung him out to dry.
    It was the various French Presidents who thought they could control this bull in a china shop that I found amusing. There is no stopping her or the damage she causes.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,337

    kyf_100 said:

    Yes, we're a second rate power. No delusions of imperial grandeur here.

    But the EU "deal" made it very, very clear that from within the EU we had about the same power as Merthyr Tydfil has by being part of the UK.

    Better to be an independent nation making its own choices than a minor province which has devolved its decision making powers to somewhere else.

    I'm not sure I'm following this simile correctly, but you're saying that Merthyr Tydfil should vote to Leave the UK, right?

    I mean, the pizza restaurant there is quite nice and the Taff Trail is fun, but I doubt it has a viable economic future outside the UK. I'm not even convinced it has one within it.
    In 1932-33 (without checking the exact date) there was very serious consideration given to evacuating the population and then building a large dam to flood the whole basin it sits in. This would, therefore, have forced the population to start over in a place where work might be found.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "UK, Opinium poll:

    CON-ECR: 37% (-4)
    LAB-S&D: 37% (+3)
    LDEM-ALDE: 8%
    UKIP-ENF: 7%
    GREENS-G/EFA: 4%
    SNP-G/EFA: 4%
    PC-G/EFA: 1%

    +/- vs. 30 Jan. - 1 Feb. '19

    Field work: 13/02/19 – 15/02/19
    Sample size: 1,172"
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,879
    ydoethur said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Yes, we're a second rate power. No delusions of imperial grandeur here.

    But the EU "deal" made it very, very clear that from within the EU we had about the same power as Merthyr Tydfil has by being part of the UK.

    Better to be an independent nation making its own choices than a minor province which has devolved its decision making powers to somewhere else.

    I'm not sure I'm following this simile correctly, but you're saying that Merthyr Tydfil should vote to Leave the UK, right?

    I mean, the pizza restaurant there is quite nice and the Taff Trail is fun, but I doubt it has a viable economic future outside the UK. I'm not even convinced it has one within it.
    In 1932-33 (without checking the exact date) there was very serious consideration given to evacuating the population and then building a large dam to flood the whole basin it sits in. This would, therefore, have forced the population to start over in a place where work might be found.
    Interesting - I didn't know that. Reminiscent of the post-war County Durham Category D villages. https://sites.google.com/site/waggonways/category-d
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited February 2019
    FTPT
    philiph said:

    Floater said:

    Alistair said:

    Floater said:
    Can't read the whole article but I'd imagine with only it's tiny fleet bmi was fucked when it came to operating its intra-EU flights. Whilst a behemoth like EasyJet can hive off 100 planes to its European subsidiary and rejig its schedules flybmi would have been utterly reliant on circular routes and such to get the most out of its planes.

    The hard Brexit deal we have on aviation would have been a death sentence regardless of other factors.
    And the other EU airlines that have gone under?

    Looking at that telegraph article,
    500,000 passengers pa
    17 planes
    = approx. 30,000 passengers per plane pa
    Allowing a paltry 300 days service per plane pa that equals 100 passengers per plane per day.

    Either the telegraph is miles out with its figures or it is astounding flyBe lasted so long.
    FlyBMI was only operating tiny little Embraer's, 135s and 145s. The 135s only carry 37 people and the 145s 50 people.

    As I said, the loss of intra EU rights with hard deal Brexit killed many of their routes
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    If they don't deliver soon, people won't bother listening to anything they ever say again.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,373
    AndyJS said:

    If they don't deliver soon, people won't bother listening to anything they ever say again.
    Listening to who? Long since forgotten and discounted already.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    Being totally honest, no being a smart arse, why now? Why before Brexit comes to a head? Corbyn might, for the sake of argument, switch to a referendum the second anyone jumps, just to mess with them. And it cannot be over anti semitism, since despite recent news in that area its nothing all of them have seen before.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    philiph said:

    Floater said:

    Alistair said:

    Floater said:
    Can't read the whole article but I'd imagine with only it's tiny fleet bmi was fucked when it came to operating its intra-EU flights. Whilst a behemoth like EasyJet can hive off 100 planes to its European subsidiary and rejig its schedules flybmi would have been utterly reliant on circular routes and such to get the most out of its planes.

    The hard Brexit deal we have on aviation would have been a death sentence regardless of other factors.
    And the other EU airlines that have gone under?

    Looking at that telegraph article,
    500,000 passengers pa
    17 planes
    = approx. 30,000 passengers per plane pa
    Allowing a paltry 300 days service per plane pa that equals 100 passengers per plane per day.

    Either the telegraph is miles out with its figures or it is astounding flyBe lasted so long.
    FlyBMI was only operating tiny little Embraer's, 135s and 145s. The 135s only carry 37 people and the 145s 50 people.

    As I said, the loss of intra EU rights with hard deal Brexit killed many of their routes
    3 small and 14 of the larger, I think. 100 passengers per day is still below a viable capacity for the fleet.

  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,361
    kle4 said:

    Being totally honest, no being a smart arse, why now? Why before Brexit comes to a head? Corbyn might, for the sake of argument, switch to a referendum the second anyone jumps, just to mess with them. And it cannot be over anti semitism, since despite recent news in that area its nothing all of them have seen before.
    It's very odd, as they are risking the cross-party unity on Brexit that they purport to feel strongly about. Why not wait 10 days?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,205
    I watched the Europe programmes. I didn’t know Cameron is left handed and I didn’t realise Alastair Darking was roped into the Euro crisis during the coalition negotiations.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991

    kle4 said:

    Being totally honest, no being a smart arse, why now? Why before Brexit comes to a head? Corbyn might, for the sake of argument, switch to a referendum the second anyone jumps, just to mess with them. And it cannot be over anti semitism, since despite recent news in that area its nothing all of them have seen before.
    It's very odd, as they are risking the cross-party unity on Brexit that they purport to feel strongly about. Why not wait 10 days?
    Well if they thought the jig was up maybe, but it is one of those things where either it should have been ages ago, or not yet.

    So I'm going to say the wolf is not yet here.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,373
    tlg86 said:

    I watched the Europe programmes. I didn’t know Cameron is left handed and I didn’t realise Alastair Darking was roped into the Euro crisis during the coalition negotiations.

    Darling came across pretty well I thought.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,963
    kle4 said:

    Being totally honest, no being a smart arse, why now? Why before Brexit comes to a head? Corbyn might, for the sake of argument, switch to a referendum the second anyone jumps, just to mess with them. And it cannot be over anti semitism, since despite recent news in that area its nothing all of them have seen before.
    At this point, the only reason I can think of for jumping is that they know with more or less total certainty is that the parliamentary arithmetic means that no deal is almost certain to happen, and they want to be the ones to say I told you so once it happens, and to have taken a stand against it.

    Buckle up, here we go.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900

    Is there a wolf this time?

    It is getting rather like the 48th letter situation. They left it so long that when they finally crossed that threshold, it had all fizzled out.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,691
    DavidL said:

    tlg86 said:

    I watched the Europe programmes. I didn’t know Cameron is left handed and I didn’t realise Alastair Darking was roped into the Euro crisis during the coalition negotiations.

    Darling came across pretty well I thought.
    Meanwhile Osborne put his fingers in his ears, shut his eyes and said 'you sort it out' to Darling.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    edited February 2019
    Andrew said:

    Is there a wolf this time?

    It is getting rather like the 48th letter situation. They left it so long that when they finally crossed that threshold, it had all fizzled out.
    Yes, probably, but it would at least be something different happening, which we desperately need in place of the stalling and displacement that has predominated for months.

    I'm briefly on a high, as I've had the unusual experience of seeing three movies at the cinema in one weekend, and they were all good films, so I'm going to decide to be optimistic and hope the Labour cowards have finally found their spine.

    Edit: Though this suggests not - this week is often code for never.
    https://twitter.com/katyballs/status/1097236141571563520
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,963
    Andrew said:

    Is there a wolf this time?

    It is getting rather like the 48th letter situation. They left it so long that when they finally crossed that threshold, it had all fizzled out.
    1. They believe no deal is almost certainly happening
    2. They believe no deal will be an absolute disaster for the UK
    3. They want to position themselves as the people who said "we told you so" when we're all eating dog carcasses and fighting over the last cans of corned beef.

    That's why now. Not because they can change or stop anything. But because they want to put a marker in the ground and be the people who stood up and said we told you so, if the worst comes to the worst.

    They are cowards for not standing up for what they believed in sooner, and opportunists for doing it now.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    kle4 said:

    Andrew said:

    Is there a wolf this time?

    It is getting rather like the 48th letter situation. They left it so long that when they finally crossed that threshold, it had all fizzled out.
    Yes, probably, but it would at least be something different happening, which we desperately need in place of the stalling and displacement that has predominated for months.

    I'm briefly on a high, as I've had the unusual experience of seeing three movies at the cinema in one weekend, and they were all good films, so I'm going to decide to be optimistic and hope the Labour cowards have finally found their spine.

    Edit: Though this suggests not - this week is often code for never.
    https://twitter.com/katyballs/status/1097236141571563520
    Yawn

    Umunna has so much form
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    kyf_100 said:


    The moment for a meaningful split in the labour party has passed. They should have split after Corbyn was elected leader. But they figured out that this was political suicide.

    I think "kamikaze" is the better term here.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,952
    geoffw said:

    viewcode said:

    @geoffw

    Ok, I am now on another train and so can continue the convo from downthread. Yes, the point one needs to comprehend is that the aim is to get a plurality in a seat, not a majority. The fact that seat-x voted 60/40 in terms of Leave is not relevant in itself, it's a question of how cohesive the votes are: if you can get all the Remain votes but the Leave votes are distributed amongst two or more parties, then you may win 40/30/30. In the specific instance of Labour Leave, there's little point in aiming for the Leave vote if you can't compete (if Labour, Con and Ukip are all competing for Leave votes, it's difficult to see Lab winning) and/or you lose more Remain votes than you gain Leave votes.

    If Labour could arrange a by-election in a majority Leave constituency, it would be interesting to see them put this to the test and stand an avowedly Leave candidate, see if his vote went down or up

    I don't dispute any of this. I only want to flag up a very useful new piece of analysis.
    Indeed you did. Please continue to do so, they are very interesting.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Trump's approval numbers seem to have improved since the start of the month.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history
  • Options
    StreeterStreeter Posts: 684
    kyf_100 said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    We make our own choices and stand on our own on the world stage.

    In the same way Australia or New Zealand or Canada do.

    Yes, we're a second rate power. No delusions of imperial grandeur here.

    But the EU "deal" made it very, very clear that from within the EU we had about the same power as Merthyr Tydfil has by being part of the UK.

    Better to be an independent nation making its own choices than a minor province which has devolved its decision making powers to somewhere else.
    I note you failed to answer the question. All too typical.
  • Options
    StreeterStreeter Posts: 684

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    It is interesting why you used "stronger."

    I get the impression that a lot of remain voters think being in the EU means rampaging around the world beating up smaller countries.

    I would have posed the question as - Name one beneficial reason why the UK should leave the EU.

    I used stronger because that’s what was claimed. Do try to keep up.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,373

    DavidL said:

    tlg86 said:

    I watched the Europe programmes. I didn’t know Cameron is left handed and I didn’t realise Alastair Darking was roped into the Euro crisis during the coalition negotiations.

    Darling came across pretty well I thought.
    Meanwhile Osborne put his fingers in his ears, shut his eyes and said 'you sort it out' to Darling.
    I suspect that that suited them both. Darling could say that he could not say yes without George's approval and he didn't have it. It was effectively an empty chair tactic.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,952
    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    It is interesting why you used "stronger."

    I get the impression that a lot of remain voters think being in the EU means rampaging around the world beating up smaller countries.

    I would have posed the question as - Name one beneficial reason why the UK should leave the EU.

    I used stronger because that’s what was claimed. Do try to keep up.
    There was me thinking the remain campaign was called Britain Stronger In.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    viewcode said:

    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?

    Instant Family, Alita: Battle Angel (the trailer for which looked terrible), and Happy Death Day 2 You. I was expecting the first to be good, but the others were a surprise.
  • Options
    The problem is that such was the haplessness of DD and co. that, even if it's not true, other nations can say we're crap to gain tactical advantage and everyone will believe them. Brexit has stuffed our diplomatic standing for years to come.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,952
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?

    Instant Family, Alita: Battle Angel (the trailer for which looked terrible), and Happy Death Day 2 You. I was expecting the first to be good, but the others were a surprise.
    I have a funny relationship with Battle Angel: Alita, as I remember it from many years ago when it was a pet project of James Cameron. He wanted to wait for the technology to mature but as that took many years he went off to do Avatar instead, so Robert Rodriguez ended up with the gig. I am pleased that you enjoyed it, tho I am getting a bit teed off by unconvincing CGI backgrounds.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,130

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    It is interesting why you used "stronger."

    I get the impression that a lot of remain voters think being in the EU means rampaging around the world beating up smaller countries.

    I would have posed the question as - Name one beneficial reason why the UK should leave the EU.

    I used stronger because that’s what was claimed. Do try to keep up.
    There was me thinking the remain campaign was called Britain Stronger In.
    https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/744588707957727233
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    It is interesting why you used "stronger."

    I get the impression that a lot of remain voters think being in the EU means rampaging around the world beating up smaller countries.

    I would have posed the question as - Name one beneficial reason why the UK should leave the EU.

    I used stronger because that’s what was claimed. Do try to keep up.
    There was me thinking the remain campaign was called Britain Stronger In.
    https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/744588707957727233
    That ain’t fair willy 🙁
    Does it stipulate which country the jobs were in 🙃
  • Options

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Yes, the purge is well underway - if you don't sign up fully to Rees-Moggism you've no future in the Tory party. The look and feel of the party will change unrecognisably in the coming years. I can't see anyone who doesn't have swivel eyes even bothering to apply in future.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    O/T

    "A controlling husband is no excuse for murder
    sarah baxter

    Setting free a killer because she suffered coercive control sets a bad precedent"

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/a-controlling-husband-is-no-excuse-for-murder-lsqxr785c
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618

    DavidL said:

    tlg86 said:

    I watched the Europe programmes. I didn’t know Cameron is left handed and I didn’t realise Alastair Darking was roped into the Euro crisis during the coalition negotiations.

    Darling came across pretty well I thought.
    Meanwhile Osborne put his fingers in his ears, shut his eyes and said 'you sort it out' to Darling.
    It worked out very well for us, Darling could easily say "I'm not going to be the chancellor next week" and Osborne blatantly said "I'm not he chancellor". Between those positions Britain is not on the hook for €350bn in worthless periphery debt. Imagine throwing that into the brexit mix...
  • Options
    anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,578

    The problem is that such was the haplessness of DD and co. that, even if it's not true, other nations can say we're crap to gain tactical advantage and everyone will believe them. Brexit has stuffed our diplomatic standing for years to come.
    And foreign investors will not be coming here for the foreseeable future either. UK assets are now the least popular investments to most managers and this is reflected in the relative underperformance of the UK stock market since the referendum.
  • Options
    notme2notme2 Posts: 1,006

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    It's what switched me from Remain to Leave. That and Gove's excellent op-ed on the issue.
    Funny that. The first episode made me more remainey.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    For me it was Merkel, Merkel, Merkel. She refused the emergency brake that Cameron needed, she drove the Euro to the precipice with her Bankers take the strain policy, she almost lost Greece as a member, she really screwed up the immigration crisis, she just about brought Turkey into the EU, she insisted on mandatory quotas, she played a major role in insisting that the WA had to be settled before we discussed important stuff like our future relationship, she has run an austerity program reducing domestic demand when her government has a huge surplus and a ridiculous trade surplus with the other Eurozone countries.

    Not all of that was covered in the documentaries but there was enough to see that she has never found an EU crisis that she could not make worse. Total disaster for the continent.
    Tsipras thought that Merkel would come good and cut a deal with him. She hung him out to dry.
    Indeed, the same is true for Dave. He believed, wrongly, that the Germans would come to the rescue. They didn't.

    We're literally walking down the same path with no deal brexit, someone in Downing Street is waiting for the Germans to broker a last minute peace deal. It's not going to come. Merkel is only ever in favour of Merkel. Fair enough, but it means she can't be relied on for anything.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?

    Instant Family, Alita: Battle Angel (the trailer for which looked terrible), and Happy Death Day 2 You. I was expecting the first to be good, but the others were a surprise.
    I have a funny relationship with Battle Angel: Alita, as I remember it from many years ago when it was a pet project of James Cameron. He wanted to wait for the technology to mature but as that took many years he went off to do Avatar instead, so Robert Rodriguez ended up with the gig. I am pleased that you enjoyed it, tho I am getting a bit teed off by unconvincing CGI backgrounds.
    Ah, well I've been watching some old tv shows recently, so unconvincing CGI at the cinema is rather getting a pass.

    Now I'm annoyed because the movie cost so much it's almost certain it won't make enough to get a sequel.
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    nico67 said:

    The UK could have had Tobias Ellwood a Defence Minister as Defence Secretary but May decided to put the imbecile Williamson in that role .

    I don’t vote Tory but Ellwood looks like a decent guy and at least has been in the army . He also has said this evening he’d resign if MPs weren’t offered a free vote on the Cooper amendment .

    As I remember it, it was Williamson who decided to put prize pillock Williamson in the role.
    The clear mistake you are making here is the crazy idea cabinet ministers need to be good at their jobs. They are simply as make weights. A cabinet full of just the most able and no PM loyalists? The loyalists must outnumber the able technocrats to act as PMs praetorian guard. The Elwood example is case in point, does she want a defsec saying that or gav setting alight her farts?
    Add to it the bigger beasts in party need big portfolios, wether they are any good at them or not.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    For me it was Merkel, Merkel, Merkel. She refused the emergency brake that Cameron needed, she drove the Euro to the precipice with her Bankers take the strain policy, she almost lost Greece as a member, she really screwed up the immigration crisis, she just about brought Turkey into the EU, she insisted on mandatory quotas, she played a major role in insisting that the WA had to be settled before we discussed important stuff like our future relationship, she has run an austerity program reducing domestic demand when her government has a huge surplus and a ridiculous trade surplus with the other Eurozone countries.

    Not all of that was covered in the documentaries but there was enough to see that she has never found an EU crisis that she could not make worse. Total disaster for the continent.
    Tsipras thought that Merkel would come good and cut a deal with him. She hung him out to dry.
    Indeed, the same is true for Dave. He believed, wrongly, that the Germans would come to the rescue. They didn't.

    We're literally walking down the same path with no deal brexit, someone in Downing Street is waiting for the Germans to broker a last minute peace deal. It's not going to come. Merkel is only ever in favour of Merkel. Fair enough, but it means she can't be relied on for anything.
    I very much enjoyed the series. Like you I think more of Tusk after watching,

    The weakest of all leaders seemed to be the French. Sarkozy and Hollande both came across as utterly weak and entirely played.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,956
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    tlg86 said:

    I watched the Europe programmes. I didn’t know Cameron is left handed and I didn’t realise Alastair Darking was roped into the Euro crisis during the coalition negotiations.

    Darling came across pretty well I thought.
    Meanwhile Osborne put his fingers in his ears, shut his eyes and said 'you sort it out' to Darling.
    It worked out very well for us, Darling could easily say "I'm not going to be the chancellor next week" and Osborne blatantly said "I'm not he chancellor". Between those positions Britain is not on the hook for €350bn in worthless periphery debt. Imagine throwing that into the brexit mix...
    There was a similar West Wing plot line, wasn't there?

    Darling is hugely underrated by everyone apart from on here, it would seem.
  • Options

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Alan Duncan? WTF??


    Jeez, maybe Soubry is right. Tories have been swamped by purple momentum.

    Might be worth checking those who vote at deselection meetings are not also members of the new Brexit Party.
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Alan Duncan? WTF??


    Jeez, maybe Soubry is right. Tories have been swamped by purple momentum.

    Might be worth checking those who vote at deselection meetings are not also members of the new Brexit Party.
    How do you check that?
  • Options
    dots said:

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Alan Duncan? WTF??


    Jeez, maybe Soubry is right. Tories have been swamped by purple momentum.

    Might be worth checking those who vote at deselection meetings are not also members of the new Brexit Party.
    How do you check that?
    No idea. Maybe assume everyone who turns up at a deselection meeting who you've not seen help the local MP ever before is in fact an entryist?
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    AndyJS said:

    Trump's approval numbers seem to have improved since the start of the month.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history

    He was killed by the shutdown amongst independents.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    Mortimer said:

    I very much enjoyed the series. Like you I think more of Tusk after watching,

    The weakest of all leaders seemed to be the French. Sarkozy and Hollande both came across as utterly weak and entirely played.

    The French not being in the room for the Turkey/EU deal was very telling. Where they thought the EU would be a conduit for projecting French interests across the world it has definitely become German interests that suck the air out of any room, especially wrt the Eurozone. You could tell Hollande and Sarkozy were extremely bitter about being second fiddle to Merkel and also knowing that she was making very poor decisions.

    The EU has become the new greater German empire, I think the Eurozone crisis cemented that status and essentially there is no way back now. The elected governments will, one by one, fall to populism as the people fight back in the only way possible. They will send more and more hostile politicians to Brussels until the EU becomes ungovernable.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    dots said:

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Alan Duncan? WTF??


    Jeez, maybe Soubry is right. Tories have been swamped by purple momentum.

    Might be worth checking those who vote at deselection meetings are not also members of the new Brexit Party.
    How do you check that?
    A gammon skin chart?
  • Options
    StreeterStreeter Posts: 684

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    It is interesting why you used "stronger."

    I get the impression that a lot of remain voters think being in the EU means rampaging around the world beating up smaller countries.

    I would have posed the question as - Name one beneficial reason why the UK should leave the EU.

    I used stronger because that’s what was claimed. Do try to keep up.
    There was me thinking the remain campaign was called Britain Stronger In.
    Utterly pathetic.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    dots said:

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Alan Duncan? WTF??


    Jeez, maybe Soubry is right. Tories have been swamped by purple momentum.

    Might be worth checking those who vote at deselection meetings are not also members of the new Brexit Party.
    How do you check that?
    A gammon skin chart?
    :lol:

  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,952
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?

    Instant Family, Alita: Battle Angel (the trailer for which looked terrible), and Happy Death Day 2 You. I was expecting the first to be good, but the others were a surprise.
    I have a funny relationship with Battle Angel: Alita, as I remember it from many years ago when it was a pet project of James Cameron. He wanted to wait for the technology to mature but as that took many years he went off to do Avatar instead, so Robert Rodriguez ended up with the gig. I am pleased that you enjoyed it, tho I am getting a bit teed off by unconvincing CGI backgrounds.
    Ah, well I've been watching some old tv shows recently, so unconvincing CGI at the cinema is rather getting a pass.

    Now I'm annoyed because the movie cost so much it's almost certain it won't make enough to get a sequel.
    This is going to sound ultra-pretentious, but I was looking at some clips of "the Umbrellas of Cherbourg" and the cinematography and colours are very distinct, clean and crisp. I'm not an antifan of CGI and I'm aware that it's used often and well, but I find in several cases it can be a bit blurry and fuzzy.

    ...but back to the point you are making. Yes I am pissed off about the lack of sequel. I'm still waiting for Dredd 2 and Star Trek 4... :(
  • Options
    dotsdots Posts: 615

    😃 The reason for the threats and rumours is to try and put pressure on for the leadership to back second vote, once actually quitting and sit as independents how do they then put pressure on for second vote? Those spreading the idea of something going to happen are merely useful idiots in the game. Things could actually move in favour of those trying to get second vote, so is this really the right moment to rip up party membership, muffle your voice and influence?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?

    Instant Family, Alita: Battle Angel (the trailer for which looked terrible), and Happy Death Day 2 You. I was expecting the first to be good, but the others were a surprise.
    I have a funny relationship with Battle Angel: Alita, as I remember it from many years ago when it was a pet project of James Cameron. He wanted to wait for the technology to mature but as that took many years he went off to do Avatar instead, so Robert Rodriguez ended up with the gig. I am pleased that you enjoyed it, tho I am getting a bit teed off by unconvincing CGI backgrounds.
    Ah, well I've been watching some old tv shows recently, so unconvincing CGI at the cinema is rather getting a pass.

    Now I'm annoyed because the movie cost so much it's almost certain it won't make enough to get a sequel.
    This is going to sound ultra-pretentious, but I was looking at some clips of "the Umbrellas of Cherbourg" and the cinematography and colours are very distinct, clean and crisp. I'm not an antifan of CGI and I'm aware that it's used often and well, but I find in several cases it can be a bit blurry and fuzzy.

    ...but back to the point you are making. Yes I am pissed off about the lack of sequel. I'm still waiting for Dredd 2 and Star Trek 4... :(
    I'm with you on that (although personally I thought Star Trek 3 was bloody awful, but was looking forward to the next one). Dredd was awesome, I cannot believe it bombed so much.
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    Streeter said:

    kyf_100 said:

    Sandpit said:

    MaxPB said:

    So I blitzed the BBC documentary. It really was great. I definitely like Tusk more than I did, Juncker came across as the complete **** that he clearly is. Merkel, Dave and Tsipras come out of it looking very bad, Merkel probably the worst. She's definitely been the architect of much of the EU's internal turmoil.

    I think it's also clear that Dave's poor renegotiation was a huge factor in the leave decision, part of me still thinks that if we'd just had an in/out referendum without Dave's deal the In campaign would have won by a thin margin. The fact that Dave promised so much and achieved so little with the EU calling it gold made them look completely incredulous and the British public are notoriously good at spotting a fake.

    Will try and catch up with it.

    It’s almost certain that the day the referendum was lost for Remain was the day Dave unveiled his ‘deal’, 23rd Feb 2016 from memory. It said that it was impossible to negotiate with the EU, they didn’t care about the UK, and that the Cameron government thought they’d actually accomplished something.
    Whilst Dave told us forcefully - and unconvincingly - that it was a great deal.
    Yep, that was the day that solidified leave as the only choice in my mind.

    The deal was a turd dressed up as a triumph.

    Remainers often like to laugh at leavers for not knowing our place in the world.

    But the truth is that deal told us everything we needed to know about how the EU sees us. Their contempt for us. Our utter irrelevance to them. Blowing the "it's better to be an influential voice within the EU" remainer argument out of the water.

    We are better, and stronger, out of it.
    Name one way the U.K. is stronger out of the EU.
    It is interesting why you used "stronger."

    I get the impression that a lot of remain voters think being in the EU means rampaging around the world beating up smaller countries.

    I would have posed the question as - Name one beneficial reason why the UK should leave the EU.

    I used stronger because that’s what was claimed. Do try to keep up.
    There was me thinking the remain campaign was called Britain Stronger In.
    Utterly pathetic.
    I agree the remain campaign was utterly pathetic.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    dots said:


    😃 The reason for the threats and rumours is to try and put pressure on for the leadership to back second vote, once actually quitting and sit as independents how do they then put pressure on for second vote?
    Well indeed. If they go, Corbyn would be well minded to go for a second vote in my opinion - would show they left for no reason!

  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,952
    MaxPB said:

    Mortimer said:

    I very much enjoyed the series. Like you I think more of Tusk after watching,

    The weakest of all leaders seemed to be the French. Sarkozy and Hollande both came across as utterly weak and entirely played.

    The French not being in the room for the Turkey/EU deal was very telling. Where they thought the EU would be a conduit for projecting French interests across the world it has definitely become German interests that suck the air out of any room, especially wrt the Eurozone. You could tell Hollande and Sarkozy were extremely bitter about being second fiddle to Merkel and also knowing that she was making very poor decisions.

    The EU has become the new greater German empire, I think the Eurozone crisis cemented that status and essentially there is no way back now. The elected governments will, one by one, fall to populism as the people fight back in the only way possible. They will send more and more hostile politicians to Brussels until the EU becomes ungovernable.
    The EU *is* the politicians who are sent to Brussels. It's like saying "oh I will send a maverick to Washington". It happens (as Trump demonstrate) but they don't change the system, they inhabit it.
  • Options
    It feels we are at a tipping point. Both main parties succumbing to entryism and utter madness.

    Labour now demanding everyone signs a loyalty card to the supreme leader.*

    Tories deselecting MPs who actually vote for their own leader.

    There's about to be a massive kaboom imho.


    * No Jews allowed to sign obviously.
  • Options
    Blair deliberately not ruling a comeback in Sunday Time this morning.

  • Options
    kle4 said:

    dots said:


    😃 The reason for the threats and rumours is to try and put pressure on for the leadership to back second vote, once actually quitting and sit as independents how do they then put pressure on for second vote?
    Well indeed. If they go, Corbyn would be well minded to go for a second vote in my opinion - would show they left for no reason!

    There is more chance of my cat landing on Mars.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,361



    No idea. Maybe assume everyone who turns up at a deselection meeting who you've not seen help the local MP ever before is in fact an entryist?

    Problem is that there are lots of members of all parties who (IMO quite reasonably) feel they're doing their bit just by paying their subs, but who do take an interest when there's a selection. I think that's fair enough. A long gestation period before you get to vote on (de)selection would be a more effective measure, but parties rather like recruiting people on the basis of "join now and you can help decide".
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831

    Blair deliberately not ruling a comeback in Sunday Time this morning.

    FFS the man has been a busted flush for such a long time. Deluded doesn't even come close
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    dots said:


    😃 The reason for the threats and rumours is to try and put pressure on for the leadership to back second vote, once actually quitting and sit as independents how do they then put pressure on for second vote? Those spreading the idea of something going to happen are merely useful idiots in the game. Things could actually move in favour of those trying to get second vote, so is this really the right moment to rip up party membership, muffle your voice and influence?
    They haven't got any leverage that can force Corbyn's hand in their direction. He isn't prepared to listen to anyone outside of his very particular bubble.
  • Options
    You can hear the panic in this tweet:

    https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1097254339528278016
  • Options
    Snap.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,138

    Telegraph reporting that Sarah Wollaston and Sir Alan Duncan facing deselection meetings soon. It is looking like it could be a very interesting time in politics what with the Labour goings on. I can see the Lib Dem slogan at the next election being "Strong and Stable."

    Nothing formally tabled yet about Sarah Wollaston.

    Of course, if you were thinking of decamping to a new party, it might suit you if those rumours were put around.

    "I was being put under intolerable pressure...."
  • Options

    Blair deliberately not ruling a comeback in Sunday Time this morning.

    FFS the man has been a busted flush for such a long time. Deluded doesn't even come close
    We will see.
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    dots said:


    😃 The reason for the threats and rumours is to try and put pressure on for the leadership to back second vote, once actually quitting and sit as independents how do they then put pressure on for second vote? Those spreading the idea of something going to happen are merely useful idiots in the game. Things could actually move in favour of those trying to get second vote, so is this really the right moment to rip up party membership, muffle your voice and influence?
    Excellent point . This looks exactly as you suggested , putting pressure on the leadership to back a second vote.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    Scott_P said:
    If they don't jump, doesn't he need to face the question of why he even wants them in the party he serves so passionately (albeit not from within parliament) if that is his opinion of them?
  • Options



    No idea. Maybe assume everyone who turns up at a deselection meeting who you've not seen help the local MP ever before is in fact an entryist?

    Problem is that there are lots of members of all parties who (IMO quite reasonably) feel they're doing their bit just by paying their subs, but who do take an interest when there's a selection. I think that's fair enough. A long gestation period before you get to vote on (de)selection would be a more effective measure, but parties rather like recruiting people on the basis of "join now and you can help decide".
    Fair point. I was being a little flippant.
  • Options

    It feels we are at a tipping point. Both main parties succumbing to entryism and utter madness.

    Labour now demanding everyone signs a loyalty card to the supreme leader.*

    Tories deselecting MPs who actually vote for their own leader.

    There's about to be a massive kaboom imho.


    * No Jews allowed to sign obviously.

    Just a correction. Those calling for deselection are ukip infiltrators in the main, not tories
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    viewcode said:

    MaxPB said:

    Mortimer said:

    I very much enjoyed the series. Like you I think more of Tusk after watching,

    The weakest of all leaders seemed to be the French. Sarkozy and Hollande both came across as utterly weak and entirely played.

    The French not being in the room for the Turkey/EU deal was very telling. Where they thought the EU would be a conduit for projecting French interests across the world it has definitely become German interests that suck the air out of any room, especially wrt the Eurozone. You could tell Hollande and Sarkozy were extremely bitter about being second fiddle to Merkel and also knowing that she was making very poor decisions.

    The EU has become the new greater German empire, I think the Eurozone crisis cemented that status and essentially there is no way back now. The elected governments will, one by one, fall to populism as the people fight back in the only way possible. They will send more and more hostile politicians to Brussels until the EU becomes ungovernable.
    The EU *is* the politicians who are sent to Brussels. It's like saying "oh I will send a maverick to Washington". It happens (as Trump demonstrate) but they don't change the system, they inhabit it.
    No, the EU is the Brussels machine. It's the likes of Juncker and Selmayr. In the documentary it is shown that Juncker outmanoeuvred Tusk wrt the compulsory migrant quota (something he said many times would be a disaster and push smaller countries away from the centre). That's the EU. The new populist governments aren't going to stand for that kind of stuff. They will point blank refuse to play the EU game which means there won't be majority voting to over rule the European council like last time. Germany won't be able to dictate to them that they will have to clean up the problems of Germany's making because they will simply refuse and the EU will be powerless to compel them.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    If any Labour MPs did jump together (the few who have dribbled out individually so far, not to any new grouping, don't seem to have have acted as catalysts) surely a key question would be if any Tories joined them at the same time? If Soubry and Wollaston say, don't make the leap at the same time then it remains just a Labour issue, and won't develop any, ahem, momentum, as Tories draw strength from their opponents weakness and those not so bold stay in place.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,138
    Scott_P said:
    That guy on the left with his hands in the air is going "Shit! Where have you put the ice lid, guys? That dick Williamson is going to be able to get out....."
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,952
    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    kle4 said:

    viewcode said:

    @kle4

    Ok. What were the films?

    Instant Family, Alita: Battle Angel (the trailer for which looked terrible), and Happy Death Day 2 You. I was expecting the first to be good, but the others were a surprise.
    I have a funny relationship with Battle Angel: Alita, as I remember it from many years ago when it was a pet project of James Cameron. He wanted to wait for the technology to mature but as that took many years he went off to do Avatar instead, so Robert Rodriguez ended up with the gig. I am pleased that you enjoyed it, tho I am getting a bit teed off by unconvincing CGI backgrounds.
    Ah, well I've been watching some old tv shows recently, so unconvincing CGI at the cinema is rather getting a pass.

    Now I'm annoyed because the movie cost so much it's almost certain it won't make enough to get a sequel.
    This is going to sound ultra-pretentious, but I was looking at some clips of "the Umbrellas of Cherbourg" and the cinematography and colours are very distinct, clean and crisp. I'm not an antifan of CGI and I'm aware that it's used often and well, but I find in several cases it can be a bit blurry and fuzzy.

    ...but back to the point you are making. Yes I am pissed off about the lack of sequel. I'm still waiting for Dredd 2 and Star Trek 4... :(
    I'm with you on that (although personally I thought Star Trek 3 was bloody awful, but was looking forward to the next one). Dredd was awesome, I cannot believe it bombed so much.
    Dredd is a science-fiction icon that is little-known outside the UK and a true-to-the-strip representation wouldn't have the global appeal necessary to justify the production cost. I think the Alex Garland version was as good as it can get: cast was perfect, script was good, music was good, action was brilliant, filming was cheap... and they still couldn't make a profit. I hope for a sequel but I'm not expecting one... :(
  • Options

    It feels we are at a tipping point. Both main parties succumbing to entryism and utter madness.

    Labour now demanding everyone signs a loyalty card to the supreme leader.*

    Tories deselecting MPs who actually vote for their own leader.

    There's about to be a massive kaboom imho.


    * No Jews allowed to sign obviously.

    Been saying this for a while. Both parties beyond snapping point. Entertaining that the deselection tumbrills are beating simultaneously for centre left/right MPs for the crime of not being the required levels of batshit crazy
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    I still don't believe we are on the cusp of new centrist party.

    What is the point of a new party set up to campaign for a 2nd Referendum and some rather nebulous form of social democracy?

    Don't we already have the LDs for that sort of thing? What would make the Leslie/Chuka party significantly different?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618

    It feels we are at a tipping point. Both main parties succumbing to entryism and utter madness.

    Labour now demanding everyone signs a loyalty card to the supreme leader.*

    Tories deselecting MPs who actually vote for their own leader.

    There's about to be a massive kaboom imho.


    * No Jews allowed to sign obviously.

    Just a correction. Those calling for deselection are ukip infiltrators in the main, not tories
    Hopefully the party introduce new rules to limit participants in selection to members who have been in the party for at least 18 months or something along those lines. We can't have a bunch of idiots coming in and making the party completely toxic.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    MaxPB said:

    It feels we are at a tipping point. Both main parties succumbing to entryism and utter madness.

    Labour now demanding everyone signs a loyalty card to the supreme leader.*

    Tories deselecting MPs who actually vote for their own leader.

    There's about to be a massive kaboom imho.


    * No Jews allowed to sign obviously.

    Just a correction. Those calling for deselection are ukip infiltrators in the main, not tories
    Hopefully the party introduce new rules to limit participants in selection to members who have been in the party for at least 18 months or something along those lines. We can't have a bunch of idiots coming in and making the party completely toxic.
    I thought the party has been full of "nasty" members for 20 years or more.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    nico67 said:

    dots said:


    😃 The reason for the threats and rumours is to try and put pressure on for the leadership to back second vote, once actually quitting and sit as independents how do they then put pressure on for second vote? Those spreading the idea of something going to happen are merely useful idiots in the game. Things could actually move in favour of those trying to get second vote, so is this really the right moment to rip up party membership, muffle your voice and influence?
    Excellent point . This looks exactly as you suggested , putting pressure on the leadership to back a second vote.
    How many times have they played this game though? This feels about as close to the edge as they've dared push it, but if the leadership continues to merely 'not rule out' a second referendum and they do nothing they're done.

    If I had to guess I would think they'll be as cowardly as MPs who keep allowing May to push back Brexit votes knowing she cannot deliver what they say they need, and they'll accept some new private assurance from Corbyn that of course a vote is on the table, give him a few more weeks, it's May's fault, and so on and so forth.
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    I still don't believe we are on the cusp of new centrist party.

    What is the point of a new party set up to campaign for a 2nd Referendum and some rather nebulous form of social democracy?

    Don't we already have the LDs for that sort of thing? What would make the Leslie/Chuka party significantly different?

    I agree with this. We seem to have a lot of people that are in the Con and Lab party that should be very at home in the Lib Dems. They just seem to be unable to admit it.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991

    I still don't believe we are on the cusp of new centrist party.

    What is the point of a new party set up to campaign for a 2nd Referendum and some rather nebulous form of social democracy?

    Don't we already have the LDs for that sort of thing? What would make the Leslie/Chuka party significantly different?

    Well quite. Wasn't there talk of there being some sort of alliance between Labour defectors and the LDs, rather than coming together in a new party? Which would rather show the problem, in that the former Labourites would seem to think the LDs are still toxic, and the LDs don't want to be dominated by new entries, so it'd only be a marriage of convenience based around hatred of a single policy. Not a recipe for harmonious relations.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited February 2019

    Cameron did the worst thing a leader can do by creating a sense of humiliation. The reaction of Conservatives to his deal was wholly irrational because of it.

    No, it's simpler than that. Steve Baker and the other ERGers had carefully been biding their time with a 'we'll wait to see what the PM brings back' - a position which appeared eminently reasonable - whilst all along they were waiting to trash it whatever was in it (a trick they successfully repeated with the EU's withdrawal deal). What is extraordinary is that so many people were conned by the trashing on both occasions. Of course, with the benefit of hindsight Cameron's deal looks absolutely fabulous compared with May's, and May's will in the future look stunningly good compared with what we end up with.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    edited February 2019

    I still don't believe we are on the cusp of new centrist party.

    What is the point of a new party set up to campaign for a 2nd Referendum and some rather nebulous form of social democracy?

    Don't we already have the LDs for that sort of thing? What would make the Leslie/Chuka party significantly different?

    I agree with this. We seem to have a lot of people that are in the Con and Lab party that should be very at home in the Lib Dems. They just seem to be unable to admit it.
    Such is the LD paradox - that they should be a lot more popular than they are. Do they have any plan to overcome it?
This discussion has been closed.