I think the TIG need some significant new defections soon or they risk deflating. I saw plenty of reasons for Labour switchers this week but so far zilch. On the Tory side I see less reason as the ERG are now very much on the defensive and will be until a deal goes through.
However, if Labour MPs continue to await the inevitable guillotin of deselection while Hackney Abbott sits idlt by with 'knitted brows' - to be frank they deserve their fate. Not sure what the voters will make of it in a months time if nothing much has happened. Labour could easily bonce back.
I think the TIG need some significant new defections soon or they risk deflating. I saw plenty of reasons for Labour switchers this week but so far zilch. On the Tory side I see less reason as the ERG are now very much on the defensive and will be until a deal goes through.
However, if Labour MPs continue to await the inevitable guillotin of deselection while Hackney Abbott sits idlt by with 'knitted brows' - to be frank they deserve their fate. Not sure what the voters will make of it in a months time if nothing much has happened. Labour could easily bonce back.
Additionally, now the Tiggers have done their thing rumours of 'dozens' of Mps thinking of quitting unless X happens will Be much more effective. There may not be a need to actually jump any more
My wife, who isn't particularly interested in politics, watched the story about Grayling on the 1.30pm ITV News and remarked "If only we had a decent Opposition".
Every time May's team leaks signs of hope the EU or the DUP or whoever are quick to respond. If all the EU are doing is giving a straight no to all the demands on the backstop what the hell is taking so long? Getting in games of backgammon?
Hang on though - weren't we told by the ERG mob in January that voting down May's Deal would force the EU's hand?
Every time May's team leaks signs of hope the EU or the DUP or whoever are quick to respond. If all the EU are doing is giving a straight no to all the demands on the backstop what the hell is taking so long? Getting in games of backgammon?
Hang on though - weren't we told by the ERG mob in January that voting down May's Deal would force the EU's hand?
Someone downthread (@floater?) was talking about stockpiling and GDP growth.
Quick technical note:
Inventories are measured through the Gross Capital Formation part of GDP. So, if inventories in the economy rose from £1bn to £2bn, then - all other things being equal - the economy would be £1bn larger. (It is the change in inventories which is the key.)
However, all other things are not equal. If those inventories are entirely of imported goods, then it must be the case that net exports fell by £1bn, and therefore the economy is no bigger than before. Stockpiling foreign copper does not increase the size of the economy*.
Not all stockpiling is of imported goods. And some stockpiling does add to GDP. Taking the former example. Some UK car makers are planning to shutdown for a week in early April. That is not a sign that they have higher than normal levels of components - on the contrary, it suggests that they have a higher than normal level of finished, and semi-finished, goods.
Across the UK economy, inventories are around 7% of GDP. If we assume that they have been increased by approximately 10% (to 7.7%), but that half of that is offset by a fall in net exports, then that would suggest that stock piling boosted Q4 and Q1 GDP by approximately 0.35%.
* Well, it does actually, in that people will need to be employed to unload the copper, transport it to your warehouse, and guard it. But it isn't the rise in inventories that captures that.
In terms of turnout? Yes that would be important. A landslide for (say) Remain in a Euro election would mean little if far fewer than (say) 33m people voted.
But then again, that same point would apply equally to an actual REF2.
In terms of turnout? Yes that would be important. A landslide for (say) Remain in a Euro election would mean little if far fewer than (say) 33m people voted.
But then again, that same point would apply equally to an actual REF2.
No.
If turnout in an EU Ref2 were low that would be disappointing but the result would mean an awful lot regardless.
A while ago someone on here tipped Chris Williamson as next Labour Leader on the basis of his work touring the country to talk to local Labour groups. It looks as though that work is paying off for him now.
I suppose none of the sane not anti-Semitic people within Labour have been making the same [internal] effort. Probably been too busy with Brexit, campaigning against Tories, etc. Labour might be further gone than I feared.
In terms of turnout? Yes that would be important. A landslide for (say) Remain in a Euro election would mean little if far fewer than (say) 33m people voted.
But then again, that same point would apply equally to an actual REF2.
The big difference is that non-Commonwealth/Irish EU citizens can vote in the EU elections, but not in a referendum.
As usual, the various far left factions are much more interested in opposing each other, than opposing the Conservative government.
Considering some of those on the right of the party actually left to do exactly that I'm not sure the charge really works against the left.
Surely it is the right of the party that are more interested in internal fighting than fighting the Conservatives. It might be 'the right thing to do' in the minds of many Conservative voters (as would something similar in the Conservatives in the minds of Labour voters) but surely this doesn't change the fact those on the right are the ones who want the internal battle rather than taking the fight to the Conservatives.
As usual, the various far left factions are much more interested in opposing each other, than opposing the Conservative government.
Considering some of those on the right of the party actually left to do exactly that I'm not sure the charge really works against the left.
Surely it is the right of the party that are more interested in internal fighting than fighting the Conservatives. It might be 'the right thing to do' in the minds of many Conservative voters (as would something similar in the Conservatives in the minds of Labour voters) but surely this doesn't change the fact those on the right are the ones who want the internal battle rather than taking the fight to the Conservatives.
If that is true, then it is because the right of the party is fighting anti-Semitism within the left of the party, and those who condone and excuse anti-Semitism.
Personally I'd say that's a fight worth having, and one it's important to ensure you're on the correct side of that battle.
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
To be fair, the 1860s civil war killed off any further temptation for cessation
It's something I was talking about last night. If the euro elections go ahead, there won't be a second referendum. Because if its a strong remain turnout the leavers in Parliament will take whatever they can get. And if its a strong leave turnout I suspect the fervour for a "people's" vote will die out pretty fast, once its clear what the "people" will actually say. And of course if its close, we know that another referendum will solve nothing.
Yes I can see that logic.
But TBH I view REF2 as a unicorn grazing gently with its fellows (No Deal, A Different Deal, Revoke) in the field set aside for them.
Meanwhile in the field next door, the one reserved for prosaic beasts of burden that can actually be set to work, there stands in isolation a creature much abused but nevertheless still willing and able to serve - the Withdrawal Agreement.
We must sign it on order to leave the European Union. C'est ca. C'est has always been ca.
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
To be fair, the 1860s civil war killed off any further temptation for cessation
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
To be fair, the 1860s civil war killed off any further temptation for cessation
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
To be fair, the 1860s civil war killed off any further temptation for cessation
At what point up until 1860... interesting it was the lack of any constitutional means to leave the union that made the Supreme Court determine it was unconstitutional to do so. If there was no article 50 which in itself it only a treaty or two old, would the same argument have been made here also?
The Commission has probably had time to develop a whole syllabus to help educate visiting British ministers on the backstop. Cox is currently up to Module 5 - "Sanitary and phytosanitary measures" and hoping to become a Certified Backstop Expert in time for the March deadline.
I'm in favour of a long extension. A year say. Why rush this?
A year would allow time for the Withdrawal Treaty to be totally re-engineered. It could be translated into Morse Code and its current lack of pictures could be rectified.
The new version once printed and placed on a sliver platter could then make a journey across the continent, being passed from hand to hand, rather like the Olympic Torch, arriving in the Mall just as the year is up.
And waiting there, pen in hand, the British Prime Minister, whoever that might be.
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
Ummmm... If Scotland voted to leave the UK that wouldn't be an act of sedition
The Commission has probably had time to develop a whole syllabus to help educate visiting British ministers on the backstop. Cox is currently up to Module 5 - "Sanitary and phytosanitary measures" and hoping to become a Certified Backstop Expert in time for the March deadline.
I'm in favour of a long extension. A year say. Why rush this?
A year would allow time for the Withdrawal Treaty to be totally re-engineered. It could be translated into Morse Code and its current lack of pictures could be rectified.
The new version once printed and placed on a sliver platter could then make a journey across the continent, being passed from hand to hand, rather like the Olympic Torch, arriving in the Mall just as the year is up.
And waiting there, pen in hand, the British Prime Minister, whoever that might be.
It's not within the gift of the UK parliament to grant an extension. All they can do to defer Brexit is revoke A50, which no-one, but no-one is actually going to do.
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
You lose the capacity to leave for most practical purposes when you join the Euro. In the end it is inevitable that all EU members will be in it and that there will be political, fiscal and economic union within its members. That is what the Euro meant.
For that reason the UK should have had a referendum on the Euro regardless of whether we were going to join it. The UK would and should have prevented the Euro altogether. The referendum should have been about what sort of EU it was going to be. To this day millions of moderates in the UK want a commercial and trading relationship which is highly integrated without fiscal and political union. Our biggest post war failure is not to achieve it.
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
Ummmm... If Scotland voted to leave the UK that wouldn't be an act of sedition
No, but holding a vote and attempting to actually become independent without the endorsement or support of the UK government would be.
Silence, Untermensch, and be grateful the Teutonic Supermen grant your elected pygmies permission to sit in their glorious Hall of Heroes to applaud the wisdom of the Commission!
It's not within the gift of the UK parliament to grant an extension. All they can do to defer Brexit is revoke A50, which no-one, but no-one is actually going to do.
If MPs vote for an extension I'm pretty sure the EU will grant it. Do you think they won't?
Gary Younge recently argued contrarywise, that things like this are entirely in keeping with what everyone has known all along about Trump's character - and his voters bought into it.
It's not within the gift of the UK parliament to grant an extension. All they can do to defer Brexit is revoke A50, which no-one, but no-one is actually going to do.
If MPs vote for an extension I'm pretty sure the EU will grant it. Do you think they won't?
My assumption is you're right.. but there must be a bit of them which wonders whether folding their arms with a gallic shrug might force us to revoke.
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Absolutely. There has been far too little focus on where the EU is going (on its way to oblivion?).
At what point do you lose the capacity to leave? At what point did South Carolina move from been a sovereign member state of a perpetual union federation, to one in which secession became an act of sedation resulting in a war with the remaining states? How many further treaties down the line would we need to be?
Ummmm... If Scotland voted to leave the UK that wouldn't be an act of sedition
“Simone is a conscientious worker who has stopped Chris Grayling from eating decorative plastic fruit and giving Network Rail to some Nigerian chap he was in email contact with. However, staff cuts have meant she has had to shoulder the work of two people. Brief lapses of cover do happen and Chris Grayling uses these to start fires or sign shipping contracts with people who say they think boats are pretty."
The only way of leaving is by accepting it's worse than Remaining, which is what I think Lilico intended to write. That's why a bunch of the more aware voted Remain. It's better than Leave.
Remain Now may be better than Leave Now. But what about the future?
We have no crystal ball. What we can see is that the EU has many fundamental problems as they try to forge an ever closer union. They may be able to pull together amicably or they may require force (economic or military) to build it. Human history strongly suggests the latter - either to forge it (as per the US Civil War) or prevent its breakup (Yugoslavia). Personally I want no part of that.
Don't forget our own history of forming a union. Which makes it more amusing to me that Nationalists are so pro-EU.
That the one that was done by 12 Tory chancers for money and has led to the people being ripped off for 300 years.
And Corbyn needs to push ahead with deselection: the current PLP will never let him go ahead with the wackier things he wants to do, which also happen to be the things he seems to want to do the most.
In the latter half of WWII, the Germans came up with phenomenal tank designs but (for various different reasons) could not make them reliable nor in sufficient numbers. As a result there were not many Tigers, King Tigers, Panthers et al. This means that individual tanks can be identified.
Your tank is Tiger 812 (nicknamed "Tiki") of the 8/SSPzRgt 2, a regiment better known as "Das Reich". This bunch of murderous bastards were immortalised in Max Hastings' book also called "Das Reich", which detailed their attempts to make it from their posting to the Normandy beaches to help repel D-Day. Their route was crucially delayed by Allied bombing, British special forces, and the French Resistance, some of whom died hideous deaths in their efforts to halt the German advance, including the Oradour-sur-Glane massacre.
The big difference is that non-Commonwealth/Irish EU citizens can vote in the EU elections, but not in a referendum.
Good point. Hadn't thought of that. Perhaps just this once they could sit this one out. Take one for the team as it were.
Doesn't matter how many of them vote or not, the Leavers will still knock a couple of million off the total number of voters for Remain parties on the assumption that they did vote.
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
My assumption is you're right.. but there must be a bit of them which wonders whether folding their arms with a gallic shrug might force us to revoke.
Yes if this were a straight business negotiation that would be the move. Time's up. No Deal kills you, we know this, so sign the Deal on the table or Stay.
That they won't do that demonstrates that (contrary to much naive commentary) big time politics is nothing like business.
The Donald and his fans would disagree, obviously, which simply re-enforces the point.
That tiny part of me that allows conspiracy theories just had an interesting one. That Cohen is still working with Trump to protect Trump.
Think about it: 1. His testimony that he is a liar-turned-truthteller is undone by his own [documented] lie that he did not want a job in the White House 2. In condemning Donald Trump and in presenting documentary evidence as to Trump's direct knowledge and involvement in paying off the two women, he exculpated Trump from the only charge that could arise from that behaviour - campaign finance violations - by stating that Trump wanted to keep it a secret from Melania, and by stating elsewhere that Trump did not expect to win but ran the campaign as an infomercial for Trump's various enterprises. 3. He directly said he has no evidence of collusion with Russia, the starting point for the entire investigation 4. His various bombshells are all really hearsay which can be refuted by the hearsay of the others mentioned in them. 5. Cohen's ostensible anger at Trump is perfect cover for and diversion from him achieving 1 and 2 above.
All in all, I'd say Cohen's testimony went just as well as it could have for Trump. The real shockers all related to what Cohen could not talk about (ongoing investigations by Manhattan's Southern District), and they were there regardless of Cohen's testimony.
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
I wadnt aware it was an issue from the right against the left but I must confess I did wonder why the price of the steak was important news.
My assumption is you're right.. but there must be a bit of them which wonders whether folding their arms with a gallic shrug might force us to revoke.
Yes if this were a straight business negotiation that would be the move. Time's up. No Deal kills you, we know this, so sign the Deal on the table or Stay.
That they won't do that demonstrates that (contrary to much naive commentary) big time politics is nothing like business.
The Donald and his fans would disagree, obviously, which simply re-enforces the point.
That, indeed, is Trump's biggest failing - not to realize that politics is way more complex than business, so much so that, for the most part, entirely different strategies and tactics are required (for which he is impressively ill-equipped).
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
I wadnt aware it was an issue from the right against the left but I must confess I did wonder why the price of the steak was important news.
Alex Wickham is hardly from the Left of the political fence so I use the term "Right" not to mean the sensible thoughtful conservatives of the centre-right but those whose aim is to antagonise and provoke (and they exist on the Left as well)
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
Didn’t George Osborne getting Byron Burgers delivered to no 11 cause a story? With his luxury £11 burger that only a rich public school Tory Toff would spend £11 on a burger narrative.
It's not within the gift of the UK parliament to grant an extension. All they can do to defer Brexit is revoke A50, which no-one, but no-one is actually going to do.
If MPs vote for an extension I'm pretty sure the EU will grant it. Do you think they won't?
I think there's a reasonable change either France or Spain seek to screw us over. However, if we just need an extension to cross the i's and dot the t's then I'd say you're right.
For that reason the UK should have had a referendum on the Euro regardless of whether we were going to join it. The UK would and should have prevented the Euro altogether. The referendum should have been about what sort of EU it was going to be. To this day millions of moderates in the UK want a commercial and trading relationship which is highly integrated without fiscal and political union. Our biggest post war failure is not to achieve it.
The UK could not have prevented the Euro from happening. Furthermore people who think you can have a deeply integrated trading relationship without politics are simply deluding themselves.
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
I think he's better than Abbott at media interviews and that counts for a lot with people in the media.
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
He didn’t weekly appear on the highest rating prime time bbc political discussion show for about six years before getting appointed to a more senior role in politics ?
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
I think he's better than Abbott at media interviews and that counts for a lot with people in the media.
Speaking on BBC Question Time Chris Grayling said: "We will maintain a free-flowing border at Dover, we will not impose checks at the port, it is utterly unrealistic to do so. We don't check lorries now, we're not going to be checking lorries in the future."
Mairead McGuiness, vice president of the European Parliament, asked him: "So you're not leaving?"
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
He didn’t weekly appear on the highest rating prime time bbc political discussion show for about six years before getting appointed to a more senior role in politics ?
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
Didn’t George Osborne getting Byron Burgers delivered to no 11 cause a story? With his luxury £11 burger that only a rich public school Tory Toff would spend £11 on a burger narrative.
I'm sure I've spent only a few quid less than that on a burger from Burger King, which is hardly fine dining*.
£48 for a steak is a bit more outside of my usual but I assume London prices are playing a factor there.
Edit: *Actually I take this back it's delicious just not posh.
For that reason the UK should have had a referendum on the Euro regardless of whether we were going to join it. The UK would and should have prevented the Euro altogether. The referendum should have been about what sort of EU it was going to be. To this day millions of moderates in the UK want a commercial and trading relationship which is highly integrated without fiscal and political union. Our biggest post war failure is not to achieve it.
I think your point about wishing we had preventing the Euro from happening speaks to a broader problem the UK has had in coming to terms with post-Cold War geopolitics. To a lot of people, the 80s was a period of increasing national self-confidence and swagger, and they weren't prepared for that world to come to an abrupt halt when the Soviet bloc collapsed.
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
Point of order - I am not sure it is possible to be 5 x more stupid than Abbott
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
I think he's better than Abbott at media interviews and that counts for a lot with people in the media.
I also think that right now, and ever since the ferry-company-with-no-ferries thing, he's been getting a LOT more stick than Jezza's ex.
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
I think he's better than Abbott at media interviews and that counts for a lot with people in the media.
Speaking on BBC Question Time Chris Grayling said: "We will maintain a free-flowing border at Dover, we will not impose checks at the port, it is utterly unrealistic to do so. We don't check lorries now, we're not going to be checking lorries in the future."
Mairead McGuiness, vice president of the European Parliament, asked him: "So you're not leaving?"
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
Didn’t George Osborne getting Byron Burgers delivered to no 11 cause a story? With his luxury £11 burger that only a rich public school Tory Toff would spend £11 on a burger narrative.
He would possibly walk a membership vote. Corbyn under the bus tomorrow, he would win...
"Possibly walk" is an odd combination of tentativeness (if that's a word) with certainty. I greatly doubt it myself, though I quite like him for his animal welfare commitment before it was fashionable.
In the latter half of WWII, the Germans came up with phenomenal tank designs but (for various different reasons) could not make them reliable nor in sufficient numbers. As a result there were not many Tigers, King Tigers, Panthers et al. This means that individual tanks can be identified.
Your tank is Tiger 812 (nicknamed "Tiki") of the 8/SSPzRgt 2, a regiment better known as "Das Reich". This bunch of murderous bastards were immortalised in Max Hastings' book also called "Das Reich", which detailed their attempts to make it from their posting to the Normandy beaches to help repel D-Day. Their route was crucially delayed by Allied bombing, British special forces, and the French Resistance, some of whom died hideous deaths in their efforts to halt the German advance, including the Oradour-sur-Glane massacre.
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
No, it gets mentioned about tories too.
See for example, various Tory Social Events pretty much all the time.
Even though Chris Grayling is 5x as stupid as Diane Abbott, he doesn't receive the same level of stick from the public. Three possible reasons for this are 1. most people wouldn't recognise him if they met him, 2. press go much harder on lefties, and 3. he's a bloke. Any others?
I think he's better than Abbott at media interviews and that counts for a lot with people in the media.
Speaking on BBC Question Time Chris Grayling said: "We will maintain a free-flowing border at Dover, we will not impose checks at the port, it is utterly unrealistic to do so. We don't check lorries now, we're not going to be checking lorries in the future."
Mairead McGuiness, vice president of the European Parliament, asked him: "So you're not leaving?"
Comments
Critical shortage of popcorn here.
However, if Labour MPs continue to await the inevitable guillotin of deselection while Hackney Abbott sits idlt by with 'knitted brows' - to be frank they deserve their fate. Not sure what the voters will make of it in a months time if nothing much has happened. Labour could easily bonce back.
Be much more effective. There may not be a need to actually jump any more
Quick technical note:
Inventories are measured through the Gross Capital Formation part of GDP. So, if inventories in the economy rose from £1bn to £2bn, then - all other things being equal - the economy would be £1bn larger. (It is the change in inventories which is the key.)
However, all other things are not equal. If those inventories are entirely of imported goods, then it must be the case that net exports fell by £1bn, and therefore the economy is no bigger than before. Stockpiling foreign copper does not increase the size of the economy*.
Not all stockpiling is of imported goods. And some stockpiling does add to GDP. Taking the former example. Some UK car makers are planning to shutdown for a week in early April. That is not a sign that they have higher than normal levels of components - on the contrary, it suggests that they have a higher than normal level of finished, and semi-finished, goods.
Across the UK economy, inventories are around 7% of GDP. If we assume that they have been increased by approximately 10% (to 7.7%), but that half of that is offset by a fall in net exports, then that would suggest that stock piling boosted Q4 and Q1 GDP by approximately 0.35%.
* Well, it does actually, in that people will need to be employed to unload the copper, transport it to your warehouse, and guard it. But it isn't the rise in inventories that captures that.
“Our team is diverse and drawn from different backgrounds, including a former teacher, social worker, lecturer, entrepreneur, solicitor and GP," “
But then again, that same point would apply equally to an actual REF2.
If turnout in an EU Ref2 were low that would be disappointing but the result would mean an awful lot regardless.
I suppose none of the sane not anti-Semitic people within Labour have been making the same [internal] effort. Probably been too busy with Brexit, campaigning against Tories, etc. Labour might be further gone than I feared.
Surely it is the right of the party that are more interested in internal fighting than fighting the Conservatives. It might be 'the right thing to do' in the minds of many Conservative voters (as would something similar in the Conservatives in the minds of Labour voters) but surely this doesn't change the fact those on the right are the ones who want the internal battle rather than taking the fight to the Conservatives.
Personally I'd say that's a fight worth having, and one it's important to ensure you're on the correct side of that battle.
But TBH I view REF2 as a unicorn grazing gently with its fellows (No Deal, A Different Deal, Revoke) in the field set aside for them.
Meanwhile in the field next door, the one reserved for prosaic beasts of burden that can actually be set to work, there stands in isolation a creature much abused but nevertheless still willing and able to serve - the Withdrawal Agreement.
We must sign it on order to leave the European Union. C'est ca. C'est has always been ca.
At what point up until 1860... interesting it was the lack of any constitutional means to leave the union that made the Supreme Court determine it was unconstitutional to do so. If there was no article 50 which in itself it only a treaty or two old, would the same argument have been made here also?
Hmm.
Truly terrifying.
Watson! Walk your people out of this cesspit.
A year would allow time for the Withdrawal Treaty to be totally re-engineered. It could be translated into Morse Code and its current lack of pictures could be rectified.
The new version once printed and placed on a sliver platter could then make a journey across the continent, being passed from hand to hand, rather like the Olympic Torch, arriving in the Mall just as the year is up.
And waiting there, pen in hand, the British Prime Minister, whoever that might be.
For that reason the UK should have had a referendum on the Euro regardless of whether we were going to join it. The UK would and should have prevented the Euro altogether. The referendum should have been about what sort of EU it was going to be. To this day millions of moderates in the UK want a commercial and trading relationship which is highly integrated without fiscal and political union. Our biggest post war failure is not to achieve it.
https://www.ft.com/content/8642139e-3c04-11e9-b856-5404d3811663
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/28/phones-beautiful-huawei-chinese-children-sing-companys-praises/
https://twitter.com/EdKrassen/status/1101202700098772993
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/feb/28/donald-trump-michael-cohen-racist-conman-america
No.
https://newsthump.com/2019/03/01/huge-fire-engulfs-department-of-transport-after-chris-grayling-tries-to-use-stapler/
Leaving aside the *ahem* relationship ones - I once overheard a senior Union guy talking strategy on a strike issue in the middle of the street.
https://nicktyrone.com/everything-corbyn-is-doing-now-will-only-delay-the-eventual-labour-split/
Oh, not *that* Phil Collins.
It's always curious that whenever someone in Labour is seen eating out, the cost of it gets publicised. What do they think Labour people should do - forage from bins? The fixation of the Right with everything relating to costs and status shows the class war is far from dead.
We saw this with the snide comments about the TIG dinner at Nando's as well.
That they won't do that demonstrates that (contrary to much naive commentary) big time politics is nothing like business.
The Donald and his fans would disagree, obviously, which simply re-enforces the point.
Think about it:
1. His testimony that he is a liar-turned-truthteller is undone by his own [documented] lie that he did not want a job in the White House
2. In condemning Donald Trump and in presenting documentary evidence as to Trump's direct knowledge and involvement in paying off the two women, he exculpated Trump from the only charge that could arise from that behaviour - campaign finance violations - by stating that Trump wanted to keep it a secret from Melania, and by stating elsewhere that Trump did not expect to win but ran the campaign as an infomercial for Trump's various enterprises.
3. He directly said he has no evidence of collusion with Russia, the starting point for the entire investigation
4. His various bombshells are all really hearsay which can be refuted by the hearsay of the others mentioned in them.
5. Cohen's ostensible anger at Trump is perfect cover for and diversion from him achieving 1 and 2 above.
All in all, I'd say Cohen's testimony went just as well as it could have for Trump. The real shockers all related to what Cohen could not talk about (ongoing investigations by Manhattan's Southern District), and they were there regardless of Cohen's testimony.
Mairead McGuiness, vice president of the European Parliament, asked him: "So you're not leaving?"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-43425055/chris-grayling-no-post-brexit-lorry-checks-at-dover
£48 for a steak is a bit more outside of my usual but I assume London prices are playing a factor there.
Edit: *Actually I take this back it's delicious just not posh.
'Fixation of the Right'.
Right.
Marching people down the street with their nooses and stopping at each lamp post if I recall........
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/01/jay-inslee-2020-climate-change-1196891
Press going hard on lefties is a good joke. Anybody else here heard about Lord Ahmed?
For that matter, Corbyn's received practically no censure over marching with Stalin and hammer-and-sickle banners.