It is not often that Glasgow is considered part of the cosmopolitan, metropolitan elite!! Through the elections and over the last few years Glasgow has remained a hub of remain. Not quite at the level of Edinburgh but still solidly 2/3 or more wishing to stay in the EU.
It is very hard now to envisage a scenario where Scotland will not stay close to the EU. In the case of a hard Brexit then a rapid move to independence and re-joining is the most likely route. Following the WA route and the election of someone like Boris to replace Maybot and implement the new agreement with Europe may well have the same impact.
Without Scotland, England will become more geared towards Brexit and divergence on Europe may become wider reducing the likelihood of Scotland fully integrating with England again. The next few weeks are really the last chance to save the Union in my opinion. I hope May understands this fully.
I live in Scotland (not claiming that automatically qualifies me as an expert) and I don't agree. I'd say the chattering classes are very exercised by Brexit (as they are in England), but the for rest, though they would certainly class themselves as against, will see how it goes. I see no love of the EU outside the nicer Edinburgh suburbs.
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
They weren't ready so they asked for an extension.
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
They weren't ready so they asked for an extension.
Before going round and round in circles, jumping invented obstacles, until every other choice had fallen and one passed the post.
"the Prime Minister and her advisers have pursued an approach that will now be used in university courses on international relations as a textbook case of how not to negotiate."
Goodwin in the Telegraph
Yet they got the agreement.
Its our politicians who don't want it.
May failed hugely to negotiate support in the HoC.
True but she can't be blamed that the ERG meekly supported what she was doing and then had their tantrum when the negotiation was complete.
They should have opposed May from 2016 onwards if they wanted their 100% Hard Brexit rather than May's 80% Hard Brexit.
But, of course, back in 2016 they would have been cheering May's Deal to the rafters.
The Mansionhouse speech was nothing like how the WA turned out.
It was a big mistake pandering to her nutters when she should have been doing the opposite
Especially when the country was so divided. After all Leave's majority wasn't much more than marginal.
Exactly so. And that should have been the first item on the leavers' agenda. How do you build the support for such a huge and hazardous project?
For some of us it was. Then the Tory party chose May as leader and any chance of compromise went up in smoke
You don't think the xenophobic campaign had anything to do with it?
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
Is this a fucking joke? I just can't tell. My level of functional satire detection has been brexited down to zero.
It isn't quite a stupid as it looks. While it would only keep out the tiny minority of honest terrorrists, the question has a function.
If someone is later found out to have been a war criminal etc, they can be legally deprived of their passport on the grounds of making a false statement on the application.
Yeah, it’s why the US ESTA application has similar questons. The form for a US immigrant visa is even more specific. I was asked if I’d ever oppressed the Haitian people for instance. The US naturalization form is quite interesting too: has lots of questions about whether you’ve ever been in a militia or auxiliary police unit. I did attend the Cubs for one night, but I think that still meant I could tick “NO” to those questions.
"the Prime Minister and her advisers have pursued an approach that will now be used in university courses on international relations as a textbook case of how not to negotiate."
Goodwin in the Telegraph
Yet they got the agreement.
Its our politicians who don't want it.
May failed hugely to negotiate support in the HoC.
True but she can't be blamed that the ERG meekly supported what she was doing and then had their tantrum when the negotiation was complete.
They should have opposed May from 2016 onwards if they wanted their 100% Hard Brexit rather than May's 80% Hard Brexit.
But, of course, back in 2016 they would have been cheering May's Deal to the rafters.
The Mansionhouse speech was nothing like how the WA turned out.
It was a big mistake pandering to her nutters when she should have been doing the opposite
Especially when the country was so divided. After all Leave's majority wasn't much more than marginal.
Exactly so. And that should have been the first item on the leavers' agenda. How do you build the support for such a huge and hazardous project?
For some of us it was. Then the Tory party chose May as leader and any chance of compromise went up in smoke
You don't think the xenophobic campaign had anything to do with it?
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
"Why did the losers not collaborate with us to deny the winners what we promised them?"
Gentle reminder that my latest and most murderous (probably) book, Crown of Blood, is out now. Better still, it completes a trilogy, so there are three new books to buy if you haven't yet.
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
They weren't ready so they asked for an extension.
Before going round and round in circles, jumping invented obstacles, until every other choice had fallen and one passed the post.
It is not often that Glasgow is considered part of the cosmopolitan, metropolitan elite!! Through the elections and over the last few years Glasgow has remained a hub of remain. Not quite at the level of Edinburgh but still solidly 2/3 or more wishing to stay in the EU.
It is very hard now to envisage a scenario where Scotland will not stay close to the EU. In the case of a hard Brexit then a rapid move to independence and re-joining is the most likely route. Following the WA route and the election of someone like Boris to replace Maybot and implement the new agreement with Europe may well have the same impact.
Without Scotland, England will become more geared towards Brexit and divergence on Europe may become wider reducing the likelihood of Scotland fully integrating with England again. The next few weeks are really the last chance to save the Union in my opinion. I hope May understands this fully.
I live in Scotland (not claiming that automatically qualifies me as an expert) and I don't agree. I'd say the chattering classes are very exercised by Brexit (as they are in England), but the for rest, though they would certainly class themselves as against, will see how it goes. I see no love of the EU outside the nicer Edinburgh suburbs.
Yet, correct me if I’m wrong, every single constiuency in Scotland voted Remain.
One of the things that will interest me about the next General Election is whether, should Mr Herdson transpire to be correct and Brexit ends up never happening, there is any significant decrease in turnout.
It's often said that, for many people, the referendum represented the first time in their lives that they believed that their vote actually counted for something. This is particularly thought to be the case for less well-off voters, particularly those in Northern constituencies with enormous Labour majorities, but actually I can identify with them as well. I'm a comfortably off voter in a southern English town where the local Conservative MP, and Conservative control of both the County and District Council (not that councils matter much anyway,) would all survive a nuclear holocaust. I had no strong feelings about the poll on the change of the voting system either, and therefore the EU referendum did genuinely feel like the first and only time I was ever consulted in a meaningful way about any political decision.
I voted to leave the EU and, if Mr Herdson is right (which he may well be) and Parliament is effectively given as much can-kicking time as it wants to wriggle out of the decision altogether, then we're not going to. Having previously been a civic duty voter who traipsed down to the polling station to wield the stubby pencil every year or two, I have now drawn the logical conclusion that voting at all - for anything related to the state, anyway - is a futile exercise and no longer worth the bother. Indeed, it never really was. I'm a trade union member and will keep participating in ballots that they organise, but as regards anything to do with the state, it's over. My polling card for next month's locals is already in the shredding pile, and if I end up getting one for the Europeans then it will follow.
It makes me wonder how many more people will have drawn similar conclusions? I'm given to understand that the by-election turnout on Thursday wasn't so bad, so perhaps I'm the only one? It's quite possible that, in a few years' time, everything will have gone back to how it was and all that has transpired between 2016 and now will be naught but an increasingly distant, half-remembered nightmare. Whatever. It's just a spectator sport, after all.
Unfortunately that plays straight into the hands of those who regard the referendum result as something that has to be overturned whatever and how ever long it might take. They literally don't care if the wrong sort of people in their eyes are disillusioned and opt out.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
It is not often that Glasgow is considered part of the cosmopolitan, metropolitan elite!! Through the elections and over the last few years Glasgow has remained a hub of remain. Not quite at the level of Edinburgh but still solidly 2/3 or more wishing to stay in the EU.
It is very hard now to envisage a scenario where Scotland will not stay close to the EU. In the case of a hard Brexit then a rapid move to independence and re-joining is the most likely route. Following the WA route and the election of someone like Boris to replace Maybot and implement the new agreement with Europe may well have the same impact.
Without Scotland, England will become more geared towards Brexit and divergence on Europe may become wider reducing the likelihood of Scotland fully integrating with England again. The next few weeks are really the last chance to save the Union in my opinion. I hope May understands this fully.
I live in Scotland (not claiming that automatically qualifies me as an expert) and I don't agree. I'd say the chattering classes are very exercised by Brexit (as they are in England), but the for rest, though they would certainly class themselves as against, will see how it goes. I see no love of the EU outside the nicer Edinburgh suburbs.
Yet, correct me if I’m wrong, every single constiuency in Scotland voted Remain.
I don't know what the breakdown in constituencies was. I know every region voted against, with the Highland region being the nearest run thing. But that doesn't translate into a passion or even a liking for the institution. Scotland is not a Northern London (Edinburgh possible excepted).
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
They weren't ready so they asked for an extension.
Before going round and round in circles, jumping invented obstacles, until every other choice had fallen and one passed the post.
very good
Would have been better if I'd remembered the fences are made of dead wood that gets knocked off at every circuit.
"the Prime Minister and her advisers have pursued an approach that will now be used in university courses on international relations as a textbook case of how not to negotiate."
Goodwin in the Telegraph
Yet they got the agreement.
Its our politicians who don't want it.
May failed hugely to negotiate support in the HoC.
True but she can't be blamed that the ERG meekly supported what she was doing and then had their tantrum when the negotiation was complete.
They should have opposed May from 2016 onwards if they wanted their 100% Hard Brexit rather than May's 80% Hard Brexit.
But, of course, back in 2016 they would have been cheering May's Deal to the rafters.
The Mansionhouse speech was nothing like how the WA turned out.
It was a big mistake pandering to her nutters when she should have been doing the opposite
Especially when the country was so divided. After all Leave's majority wasn't much more than marginal.
Exactly so. And that should have been the first item on the leavers' agenda. How do you build the support for such a huge and hazardous project?
For some of us it was. Then the Tory party chose May as leader and any chance of compromise went up in smoke
You don't think the xenophobic campaign had anything to do with it?
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
"Why did the losers not collaborate with us to deny the winners what we promised them?"
It's contemptible and always was.
It seems people are confusing MP behaviour with that of voters. If the referendum had been a vote in parliament on June 23rd 2016, Remain would have won easily, but I have little doubt that there is a majority for respecting the result amongst the voting public.
Blimey, yesterday it was alleged Australian anglo-phobia, today whether it's ethical to eat meat.
You never know what filling you're going to get in your Brexit sandwich with PB!
I can go on about restoration of the Wuffingas kingdom of east Anglia if you like, I'm probably overdue
Where would you find the descendants of the kings? Or would we start gain with a newly convened Witan?
Oh a newly convened Witan. Let the fittest rule. As for someone's suggestion of the Son of Wotan SeanT, hes disqualified by being a pasty munching peninsular boy. Wrong arse end of the island
To be fair Norfolk looks more like an arse than Cornwall
One of the things that will interest me about the next General Election is whether, should Mr Herdson transpire to be correct and Brexit ends up never happening, there is any significant decrease in turnout.
It's often said that, for many people, the referendum represented the first time in their lives that they believed that their vote actually counted for something. This is particularly thought to be the case for less well-off voters, particularly those in Northern constituencies with enormous Labour majorities, but actually I can identify with them as well. I'm a comfortably off voter in a southern English town where the local Conservative MP, and Conservative control of both the County and District Council (not that councils matter much anyway,) would all survive a nuclear holocaust. I had no strong feelings about the poll on the change of the voting system either, and therefore the EU referendum did genuinely feel like the first and only time I was ever consulted in a meaningful way about any political decision.
I voted to leave the EU and, if Mr Herdson is right (which he may well be) and Parliament is effectively given as much can-kicking time as it wants to wriggle out of the decision altogether, then we're not going to. Having previously been a civic duty voter who traipsed down to the polling station to wield the stubby pencil every year or two, I have now drawn the logical conclusion that voting at all - for anything related to the state, anyway - is a futile exercise and no longer worth the bother. Indeed, it never really was. I'm a trade union member and will keep participating in ballots that they organise, but as regards anything to do with the state, it's over. My polling card for next month's locals is already in the shredding pile, and if I end up getting one for the Europeans then it will follow.
It makes me wonder how many more people will have drawn similar conclusions? I'm given to understand that the by-election turnout on Thursday wasn't so bad, so perhaps I'm the only one? It's quite possible that, in a few years' time, everything will have gone back to how it was and all that has transpired between 2016 and now will be naught but an increasingly distant, half-remembered nightmare. Whatever. It's just a spectator sport, after all.
Unfortunately that plays straight into the hands of those who regard the referendum result as something that has to be overturned whatever and how ever long it might take. They literally don't care if the wrong sort of people in their eyes are disillusioned and opt out.
So how would you advise someone who thinks it is a terrible idea that should be reversed to behave?
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
It seems to have got steadily later.
I remember the result being announced at football matches.
I expect its been delayed firstly to miss clashing with football and secondly to give more time for people to spend money on the course.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
The fall of the Berlin wall took at least 2 years!!
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
The fall of the Berlin wall took at least 2 years!!
Bits of it are still there. And there's a big line of bricks in the pavements right through Berlin's centre to show where it stood.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
Only with barriers being put up rather than pulled down.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
This is absolute nonsense, it should be pretty clear by now our political class has absolutely no intention of diverging unless it is forced.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
Only with barriers being put up rather than pulled down.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
Only with barriers being put up rather than pulled down.
Yes, by the EU.
The EU are behind Brexit? I think you are a little confused.
One of the things that will interest me about the next General Election is whether, should Mr Herdson transpire to be correct and Brexit ends up never happening, there is any significant decrease in turnout.
It's often said that, for many people, the referendum represented the first time in their lives that they believed that their vote actually counted for something. This is particularly thought to be the case for less well-off voters, particularly those in Northern constituencies with enormous Labour majorities, but actually I can identify with them as well. I'm a comfortably off voter in a southern English town where the local Conservative MP, and Conservative control of both the County and District Council (not that councils matter much anyway,) would all survive a nuclear holocaust. I had no strong feelings about the poll on the change of the voting system either, and therefore the EU referendum did genuinely feel like the first and only time I was ever consulted in a meaningful way about any political decision.
I voted to leave the EU and, if Mr Herdson is right (which he may well be) and Parliament is effectively given as much can-kicking time as it wants to wriggle out of the decision altogether, then we're not going to. Having previously been a civic duty voter who traipsed down to the polling station to wield the stubby pencil every year or two, I have now drawn the logical conclusion that voting at all - for anything related to the state, anyway - is a futile exercise and no longer worth the bother. Indeed, it never really was. I'm a trade union member and will keep participating in ballots that they organise, but as regards anything to do with the state, it's over. My polling card for next month's locals is already in the shredding pile, and if I end up getting one for the Europeans then it will follow.
It makes me wonder how many more people will have drawn similar conclusions? I'm given to understand that the by-election turnout on Thursday wasn't so bad, so perhaps I'm the only one? It's quite possible that, in a few years' time, everything will have gone back to how it was and all that has transpired between 2016 and now will be naught but an increasingly distant, half-remembered nightmare. Whatever. It's just a spectator sport, after all.
Unfortunately that plays straight into the hands of those who regard the referendum result as something that has to be overturned whatever and how ever long it might take. They literally don't care if the wrong sort of people in their eyes are disillusioned and opt out.
This kind of argument would only hold water if voting made any difference to anything.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
Only with barriers being put up rather than pulled down.
Yes, by the EU.
The EU are behind Brexit? I think you are a little confused.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
What we've had is the likes of Mogg spending two plus years in the twatter feedback loop becoming ever more extreme until they refused what would have been beyond their wishes not long before.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
Only with barriers being put up rather than pulled down.
Yes, by the EU.
The EU are behind Brexit? I think you are a little confused.
Who then is going to put the barriers up?
The idea that we could pursue a completely divergent customs and trade policy than the EU, and not have a border is why Brexit is failing.
Either accept that there needs to be a customs border (and the consequences of it) or do not diverge. It really is that simple.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
Exactly.
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
It's the flip side of seeing the EU as an oppressive superstate. They thought Brexit would be like the fall of the Berlin wall.
Only with barriers being put up rather than pulled down.
Yes, by the EU.
The EU are behind Brexit? I think you are a little confused.
Who then is going to put the barriers up?
We are. In the case of FOM we are and always were going to make coming here more difficult if Leave won. It was the root basis of the Leave campaign. In the case of everything else leaving the single market and customs union means certain barriers come up automatically as a result of our decision. Either way Brexit, the UK’s decision, was always going to put up barriers. It had to.
It is not often that Glasgow i.s considered part of the cosmopolitan, metropolitan elite!! Through the elections and over the last few years Glasgow has remained a hub of remain. Not quite at the level of Edinburgh but still solidly 2/3 or more wishing to stay in the EU.
It is very hard now to envisage a scenario where Scotland will not stay close to the EU. In the case of a hard Brexit then a rapid move to independence and re-joining is the most likely route. Following the WA route and the election of someone like Boris to replace Maybot and implement the new agreement with Europe may well have the same impact.
Without Scotland, England will become more geared towards Brexit and divergence on Europe may become wider reducing the likelihood of Scotland fully integrating with England again. The next few weeks are really the last chance to save the Union in my opinion. I hope May understands this fully.
I live in Scotland (not claiming that automatically qualifies me as an expert) and I don't agree. I'd say the chattering classes are very exercised by Brexit (as they are in England), but the for rest, though they would certainly class themselves as against, will see how it goes. I see no love of the EU outside the nicer Edinburgh suburbs.
Yet, correct me if I’m wrong, every single constiuency in Scotland voted Remain.
Indeed. By contrast in NI half the constituencies voted Leave.
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
They weren't ready so they asked for an extension.
Before going round and round in circles, jumping invented obstacles, until every other choice had fallen and one passed the post.
very good
Would have been better if I'd remembered the fences are made of dead wood that gets knocked off at every circuit.
Mrs May's deal respects the result, but ERG and DUP vote against it. Nobody wants No Deal crash out Brexit.
Is it my imagination or am I correct in my sense that the Grand National is now run much later in the day than was formerly the case? I seem to remember the race taking place fairly early in the afternoon - circa 3pm - rather than 5.30.
They weren't ready so they asked for an extension.
Before going round and round in circles, jumping invented obstacles, until every other choice had fallen and one passed the post.
very good
Would have been better if I'd remembered the fences are made of dead wood that gets knocked off at every circuit.
Mrs May's deal respects the result, but ERG and DUP vote against it. Nobody wants No Deal crash out Brexit.
"the Prime Minister and her advisers have pursued an approach that will now be used in university courses on international relations as a textbook case of how not to negotiate."
Goodwin in the Telegraph
Yet they got the agreement.
Its our politicians who don't want it.
May failed hugely to negotiate support in the HoC.
True but she can't be blamed that the ERG meekly supported what she was doing and then had their tantrum when the negotiation was complete.
They should have opposed May from 2016 onwards if they wanted their 100% Hard Brexit rather than May's 80% Hard Brexit.
But, of course, back in 2016 they would have been cheering May's Deal to the rafters.
The Mansionhouse speech was nothing like how the WA turned out.
It was a big mistake pandering to her nutters when she should have been doing the opposite
Especially when the country was so divided. After all Leave's majority wasn't much more than marginal.
Exactly so. And that should have been the first item on the leavers' agenda. How do you build the support for such a huge and hazardous project?
For some of us it was. Then the Tory party chose May as leader and any chance of compromise went up in smoke
You don't think the xenophobic campaign had anything to do with it?
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
"Why did the losers not collaborate with us to deny the winners what we promised them?"
It's contemptible and always was.
You are talking even more gibberish than usual William. And I thought that was almost impossible.
Certainly - the future relationship was always going to be 'up for grabs' in future years just as anything government does is dependent upon the prevailing political view in future years.
And this is one of the mistakes of the ERG mindset - having a crash out No Deal doesn't guarantee the UK being out of the EU forever but rather increases the risks of rejoining quickly if things go wrong.
What May's Deal does is allow an orderly exit and creates a starting point towards the Hard level of Brexit.
It does. And if they have confidence in their vision they ought to be going for it. Get out, diverge over the years and decades to come, based on events, trends, elections etc. Took us nearly half a century to integrate this far, why assume that the opposite should take less than 5 years. Seems a bit silly. And one thing is absolutely certain, if you don't get out you do not diverge at all. We are not going through this again.
This is absolute nonsense, it should be pretty clear by now our political class has absolutely no intention of diverging unless it is forced.
And to add, whether we leave or remain it's obvious we are never going to get another referendum on our relationship with the EU ever again, certainly not on terms acceptable to leavers.
So really for leavers it's all or nothing in actually permanently changing direction, anything less than a clean break means falling back into the EU's orbit.
The EU won’t agree to Tusk’s flextention for a year unless we have a definite plan. And I really can’t see that telling the EU that the chances of a g.e. in the UK are increasing does anything but detract from the idea that we have a convincing plan. Here’s a plan. [1.] It will be determined, in light of, and taking account of, the stalled discussions between May (et al) and Corbyn (et al) what options there are for a political declaration which introduces one or another definite end-state for the future UK/EU relationship. [2.] Parliament will use indicative voting to choose between the options, making use of the methods and voting systems advocated in the Hansard Society’s paper: ‘Indicative Votes: Options, voting methods and voting systems’. (The Hansard Society prepared the paper when a no-deal exit and revocation of A50 were in the reckoning. But we know that Parliament rejects both of these, at least for the short term. So we’ve got past some of the options envisaged in the paper. What’s important now is to make clear that indicative votes can be made to work.) Parliament cannot be allowed to rush towards an ill-understood upshot on something of massive constitutional significance. And it’s inconceivable that [1.] and [2.] could satisfactorily be completed ahead of TMay’s requesting something of the EU. (Even [1.] will take a little time. And as for [2.], MPs need fully to understand the options and the voting system at every stage.) But a year’s extension would provide plenty of time to follow such a plan deliberatively, and time also for a confirmatory public vote (should this prove to be wanted – a question which Parliament might actually debate). Of course a g.e. would interfere with such a plan. But if anyone’s serious about achieving compromise, and if May is prepared to settle for such plan, then no-one should be striving to get a g.e. – yet. If the plan is accepted by the EU and there were a g.e. before long, that would be a fact the EU had to confront. But it can’t belong in any plan. One can't be optimistic about TMay going to the EU with a plan in which Government allows Parliamentary votes to determine the upshot. But TMay’s more or less put herself at the mercy of Parliament. And it's a plan "to deliver Brexit". And maybe she’d like to be able to blame MPs collectively if the plan doesn’t turn up trumps. She could say that she’d taken the side of democracy.
It is not often that Glasgow is considered part of the cosmopolitan, metropolitan elite!! Through the elections and over the last few years Glasgow has remained a hub of remain. Not quite at the level of Edinburgh but still solidly 2/3 or more wishing to stay in the EU.
It is very hard now to envisage a scenario where Scotland will not stay close to the EU. In the case of a hard Brexit then a rapid move to independence and re-joining is the most likely route. Following the WA route and the election of someone like Boris to replace Maybot and implement the new agreement with Europe may well have the same impact.
Without Scotland, England will become more geared towards Brexit and divergence on Europe may become wider reducing the likelihood of Scotland fully integrating with England again. The next few weeks are really the last chance to save the Union in my opinion. I hope May understands this fully.
I hope the Scots Nationalists understand this as well. The best way for them to get what they want is for Brexit to happen. It is a win:win as far as I am concerned.
"the Prime Minister and her advisers have pursued an approach that will now be used in university courses on international relations as a textbook case of how not to negotiate."
Goodwin in the Telegraph
Yet they got the agreement.
Its our politicians who don't want it.
May failed hugely to negotiate support in the HoC.
True but she can't be blamed that the ERG meekly supported what she was doing and then had their tantrum when the negotiation was complete.
They should have opposed May from 2016 onwards if they wanted their 100% Hard Brexit rather than May's 80% Hard Brexit.
But, of course, back in 2016 they would have been cheering May's Deal to the rafters.
The Mansionhouse speech was nothing like how the WA turned out.
It was a big mistake pandering to her nutters when she should have been doing the opposite
Especially when the country was so divided. After all Leave's majority wasn't much more than marginal.
Exactly so. And that should have been the first item on the leavers' agenda. How do you build the support for such a huge and hazardous project?
For some of us it was. Then the Tory party chose May as leader and any chance of compromise went up in smoke
You don't think the xenophobic campaign had anything to do with it?
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
"Why did the losers not collaborate with us to deny the winners what we promised them?"
It's contemptible and always was.
You are talking even more gibberish than usual William. And I thought that was almost impossible.
So Sir Olly Letwin has ended Thatcher (via poll tax) and Brexit. Does Jezza have a picture of him on his wall ?
I disagree- Brexit is just starting - and it’s going to see a realignment in British politics. Which is much needed.
Anyone thinks Westminster can cancel Brexit without massive repercussions is delusional.
The current remainer plan is to play the long game. Obviously cancelling Brexit now is impossible but in a year or two who knows - we may well have a majority left/snp government by then with the leave vote being fractured in the forthcoming GE.
F1: Raikkonen reckons it's easier following cars this year.
Worth recalling Hulkenberg started 17th and was on course to finish about 6th (before his electrics died). Even bearing in mind his good start, that supports Raikkonen's view.
"the Prime Minister and her advisers have pursued an approach that will now be used in university courses on international relations as a textbook case of how not to negotiate."
Goodwin in the Telegraph
Yet they got the agreement.
Its our politicians who don't want it.
May failed hugely to negotiate support in the HoC.
True but she can't be blamed that the ERG meekly supported what she was doing and then had their tantrum when the negotiation was complete.
They should have opposed May from 2016 onwards if they wanted their 100% Hard Brexit rather than May's 80% Hard Brexit.
But, of course, back in 2016 they would have been cheering May's Deal to the rafters.
The Mansionhouse speech was nothing like how the WA turned out.
It was a big mistake pandering to her nutters when she should have been doing the opposite
Especially when the country was so divided. After all Leave's majority wasn't much more than marginal.
Exactly so. And that should have been the first item on the leavers' agenda. How do you build the support for such a huge and hazardous project?
For some of us it was. Then the Tory party chose May as leader and any chance of compromise went up in smoke
You don't think the xenophobic campaign had anything to do with it?
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
"Why did the losers not collaborate with us to deny the winners what we promised them?"
It's contemptible and always was.
You are talking even more gibberish than usual William. And I thought that was almost impossible.
Nope I just think that is an excuse from sore losers who want to find any way they can to overturn the referendum result. Why try and build bridges with someone like Meeks when he will spit in your face. I am talking about reaching out to reasonable people not lunatic fanatics like those trying to overturn the result.
"Why did the losers not collaborate with us to deny the winners what we promised them?"
It's contemptible and always was.
You are talking even more gibberish than usual William. And I thought that was almost impossible.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Fringe nobody to fringe nobody would be more accurate.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Brexit is a political graveyard, and the idiots keep digging their own graves.
At least we will see the end of national referendums. No one will want to repeat the exercise.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Fringe nobody to fringe nobody would be more accurate.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Fringe nobody to fringe nobody would be more accurate.
Does Hannan support the WDA ?
I thought he panicked and went full on for No Deal.
Any ref has to have an ERG type Brexit otherwise the betrayal narrative will go through the roof . Now that they trashed Mays deal and people have been told it’s a disaster and many believe it there has to be a different deal on offer .
The question should be Remain or Leave .
A two stage referendum held a week apart .
If the public vote to leave then you then should have two choices
Canada plus
Mays deal
But the ERG will have to put out a plan and explain their solution on NI in terms of Canada .
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Brexit is a political graveyard, and the idiots keep digging their own graves.
At least we will see the end of national referendums. No one will want to repeat the exercise.
I think you will find almost exactly half of the House Of Commons is quite keen on them - or at least, on second referendums.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Brexit is a political graveyard, and the idiots keep digging their own graves.
At least we will see the end of national referendums. No one will want to repeat the exercise.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
What on earth would be the question on Ref2?
Which is more important, the economy or our political system?
Although TBH that was the de facto question in the first one. It's just that most people didn't expect the answer we got.
There's a certain type of right-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down the welfare state would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
There's a certain type of left-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down capitalism would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
Conversely there's a certain type of Remainer who thinks discouraging the proles from ever voting again would be a feature not a bug of Revoking Brexit.
Any ref has to have an ERG type Brexit otherwise the betrayal narrative will go through the roof . Now that they trashed Mays deal and people have been told it’s a disaster and many believe it there has to be a different deal on offer .
The question should be Remain or Leave .
A two stage referendum held a week apart .
If the public vote to leave then you then should have two choices
Canada plus
Mays deal
But the ERG will have to put out a plan and explain their solution on NI in terms of Canada .
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community need a new saint.
If there are EU elections will Hannan stand again and more interestingly would he be re-elected? I am not sure very many Tory supporters will even be voting for their party let alone dipping into their pockets for the campaign or knocking on doors.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community need a new saint.
If there are EU elections will Hannan stand again and more interestingly would he be re-elected? I am not sure very many Tory supporters will even be voting for their party let alone dipping into their pockets for the campaign or knocking on doors.
On Oddschecker it is difficult to find prices for the EU Elections. Someone posted Ladbrokes odds yesterday which had the two main parties front of the betting... I am not sure they should be, but maybe haven't thought it through properly
Surely these EU elections are the free-est of free hits against the never less popular establishment?
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
What on earth would be the question on Ref2?
Which is more important, the economy or our political system?
Although TBH that was the de facto question in the first one. It's just that most people didn't expect the answer we got.
There's a certain type of right-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down the welfare state would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
There's a certain type of left-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down capitalism would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
Conversely there's a certain type of Remainer who thinks discouraging the proles from ever voting again would be a feature not a bug of Revoking Brexit.
So you're basically saying we lose the second whatever happens?
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community needs a new saint.
Brexit is a political graveyard, and the idiots keep digging their own graves.
At least we will see the end of national referendums. No one will want to repeat the exercise.
Excellent, no 2nd referendum then
At the current rate we won't need one. It will be overtaken by events.
In my experience working with people from former pit villages and towns in County Durham, there is no real 'betrayal' narrative. It's more a 'sick of it and resigned to no Brexit' narrative. The frothers are already going to be voting UKIP or Brexit Party regardless.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community need a new saint.
If there are EU elections will Hannan stand again and more interestingly would he be re-elected? I am not sure very many Tory supporters will even be voting for their party let alone dipping into their pockets for the campaign or knocking on doors.
On Oddschecker it is difficult to find prices for the EU Elections. Someone posted Ladbrokes odds yesterday which had the two main parties front of the betting... I am not sure they should be, but maybe haven't thought it through properly
Surely these EU elections are the free-est of free hits against the never less popular establishment?
You may be underestimating the willingness of tribal voters to turn out.
I am hoping for some LD and Green gains, and a clearout of the kippers, I don't think they will replicate 2014.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community need a new saint.
If there are EU elections will Hannan stand again and more interestingly would he be re-elected? I am not sure very many Tory supporters will even be voting for their party let alone dipping into their pockets for the campaign or knocking on doors.
Hannan was top of the Tory list in 2014 in the south east region - the largest region with 11 MEPs. I expect if he wants to stand again he will be re-elected.
People will vote Tory - or not - and they would only need 8 per cent of the vote to win one seat. Frankly the only south east region MEP the majority of voters could name is Nigel Farage - its a party vote not a personal one.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
I see, and you never change your mind on any subject, not even after three years during which your knowledge of that subject had increased tenfold? And even if you haven't changed your mind where is the harm in asking?
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
What on earth would be the question on Ref2?
Which is more important, the economy or our political system?
Although TBH that was the de facto question in the first one. It's just that most people didn't expect the answer we got.
There's a certain type of right-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down the welfare state would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
There's a certain type of left-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down capitalism would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
Conversely there's a certain type of Remainer who thinks discouraging the proles from ever voting again would be a feature not a bug of Revoking Brexit.
So you're basically saying we lose the second whatever happens?
In fairness, that's an extremely persuasive view.
We could always chose a path of compromise and so confound the three groups I mentioned.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
I see, and you never change your mind on any subject, not even after three years during which your knowledge of that subject had increased tenfold? And even if you haven't changed your mind where is the harm in asking?
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
It's not even worth arguing about. Every major politician (most of whom were campaigning for Remain) said that the 2016 decision was final and there would be no going back, and so it is.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community need a new saint.
If there are EU elections will Hannan stand again and more interestingly would he be re-elected? I am not sure very many Tory supporters will even be voting for their party let alone dipping into their pockets for the campaign or knocking on doors.
Hannan was top of the Tory list in 2014 in the south east region - the largest region with 11 MEPs. I expect if he wants to stand again he will be re-elected.
People will vote Tory - or not - and they would only need 8 per cent of the vote to win one seat. Frankly the only south east region MEP the majority of voters could name is Nigel Farage - its a party vote not a personal one.
That's interesting - I imagine even a Tory party discredited by Brexit failure would manage that. Would explain his sudden conversion to the longer game against the wishes of most of his supporters, the business community and the leave voting public.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
I see, and you never change your mind on any subject, not even after three years during which your knowledge of that subject had increased tenfold? And even if you haven't changed your mind where is the harm in asking?
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
It's not even worth arguing about. Every major politician (most of whom were campaigning for Remain) said that the 2016 decision was final and there would be no going back, and so it is.
The advantage of living under the rule of law, as we do, is that that makes no difference. Try Africa if you want the law to be rewritten on the fly by Big Men giving interviews on the telly.
Many a reputation has been destroyed by Brexit, but surely none more so than Hannan's. He's gone from 'rock star' to national figure of fun in a couple of years. The Leave community need a new saint.
If there are EU elections will Hannan stand again and more interestingly would he be re-elected? I am not sure very many Tory supporters will even be voting for their party let alone dipping into their pockets for the campaign or knocking on doors.
Does anyone have a clue what will happen if and when the European elections are held? I'm not sure that I do. Best guess is that the Conservatives come first in a heavily splintered field: that part of the Eurosceptic vote that was going to defect from both them and Labour probably already went in its entirety in 2014, when Ukip came first - but this time around its vote share is liable to be partitioned between the Batten and Farage factions.
Effectively, it's arguable that the Tories thus have no new competitors to contend with, whereas TIG has appeared on the progressive wing and, if it achieves any kind of success, this is likely to have a disproportionate effect on Labour.
So, in short, if he stands again and is high enough up their list then he ought to get back in without too much trouble. But I stand to be disproved by events.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
I see, and you never change your mind on any subject, not even after three years during which your knowledge of that subject had increased tenfold? And even if you haven't changed your mind where is the harm in asking?
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
It's not even worth arguing about. Every major politician (most of whom were campaigning for Remain) said that the 2016 decision was final and there would be no going back, and so it is.
The advantage of living under the rule of law, as we do, is that that makes no difference. Try Africa if you want the law to be rewritten on the fly by Big Men giving interviews on the telly.
I can so understand this. When my little 'un was really little, I've had to change my son on tarmac outside (*), in his pram, on the boot of my car (*), at places that nominally had baby-changing facilities - in the ladies, but not the mens'. In one place, a staff member stood guard so I could go into the ladies to change him.
The most egregious one was a play centre where the men's lavatories didn't have changing facilities, and I had to change him on the floor outside.
We want more men to look after their children - and that means giving them the facilities to do so.
(*) With mat.
Why wouldn’t you just go it to use it? You do t need someone to guard the door.
As I said in my post: " In one place, a staff member stood guard so I could go into the ladies to change him."
But often that isn't really an alternative when you're on your own with a child. And some women aren't exactly welcoming of a man with a baby or young child at times - but that's a different story ...
Fortunately, more and more places are having unisex toilets with baby changing (often combined disabled toilet), and stay-at-home dads are being more common.
And that's why compromise becomes ever more difficult.
On the contrary. Our relationship with Europe is a big and important issue and should be debated at the highest level on both sides. I have nothing but respect for a well made case even if I don't personally agree with it. Indeed it obliges me to think the issue over again. E.g.,
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
I see, and you never change your mind on any subject, not even after three years during which your knowledge of that subject had increased tenfold? And even if you haven't changed your mind where is the harm in asking?
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
It's not even worth arguing about. Every major politician (most of whom were campaigning for Remain) said that the 2016 decision was final and there would be no going back, and so it is.
The advantage of living under the rule of law, as we do, is that that makes no difference. Try Africa if you want the law to be rewritten on the fly by Big Men giving interviews on the telly.
Just get over it
~I "got over it" on 24 June 2016, because I didn't then and don't now see much to choose between remaining and a properly organised brexit. It's just that it now seems impossible for the latter to happen. So if your point is that I am just a disappointed europhile, it fails.
The Opinion poll panels were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Well, let's try it and find out.
No it's a reason to not try it out
What, you think you will win a Ref2 so you don't want to have one? Why don't you just write the result yourself.
There is no reason to have one no matter what I think the result would be.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
So you believe in enacting the will of the people, but are opposed to establishing what that will actually is.
Not at all, it was established in June 2016, after we were promised the result would be final.
I see, and you never change your mind on any subject, not even after three years during which your knowledge of that subject had increased tenfold? And even if you haven't changed your mind where is the harm in asking?
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
It's not even worth arguing about. Every major politician (most of whom were campaigning for Remain) said that the 2016 decision was final and there would be no going back, and so it is.
The advantage of living under the rule of law, as we do, is that that makes no difference. Try Africa if you want the law to be rewritten on the fly by Big Men giving interviews on the telly.
Just get over it
~I "got over it" on 24 June 2016, because I didn't then and don't now see much to choose between remaining and a properly organised brexit. It's just that it now seems impossible for the latter to happen. So if your point is that I am just a disappointed europhile, it fails.
My point is that clamouring for a second referendum before the first result has been implemented is pitiful, and there is no sound reason to do so.
Does anyone have a clue what will happen if and when the European elections are held? I'm not sure that I do.
Me neither. I would love to see the polls but I think they would be very susceptible to unusual turnout, especially amongst people who usually don't vote.
Comments
It's contemptible and always was.
Gentle reminder that my latest and most murderous (probably) book, Crown of Blood, is out now. Better still, it completes a trilogy, so there are three new books to buy if you haven't yet.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crown-Blood-Bloody-Trilogy-Book-ebook/dp/B07PLFC2PB/
Instead imbeciles like Mogg thought that Brexit was an Event rather than a Process.
I remember the result being announced at football matches.
I expect its been delayed firstly to miss clashing with football and secondly to give more time for people to spend money on the course.
It doesn't.
https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1114500236150550529
The MPs were Remain in 2015 and haven't changed their minds
The voters at the 2016 referendum were Leave and we don't know if they've changed their minds
But because the first two are unchanged, even though they were proven to be unrepresentative, people say the third is now Remain
Somehow I think this migrant's message isn't going to carry much weight with the people he's appealing to.
"Stay at home, says migrant who made it to Spain" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/stay-at-home-says-migrant-who-made-it-to-spain-czpwcn8gz
This is why I still expect Brexit to happen.
Cooper LetLabourWin likely hastens May’s departure, though.
Either accept that there needs to be a customs border (and the consequences of it) or do not diverge. It really is that simple.
And that's why compromise becomes ever more difficult.
So really for leavers it's all or nothing in actually permanently changing direction, anything less than a clean break means falling back into the EU's orbit.
Here’s a plan.
[1.] It will be determined, in light of, and taking account of, the stalled discussions between May (et al) and Corbyn (et al) what options there are for a political declaration which introduces one or another definite end-state for the future UK/EU relationship.
[2.] Parliament will use indicative voting to choose between the options, making use of the methods and voting systems advocated in the Hansard Society’s paper: ‘Indicative Votes: Options, voting methods and voting systems’. (The Hansard Society prepared the paper when a no-deal exit and revocation of A50 were in the reckoning. But we know that Parliament rejects both of these, at least for the short term. So we’ve got past some of the options envisaged in the paper. What’s important now is to make clear that indicative votes can be made to work.)
Parliament cannot be allowed to rush towards an ill-understood upshot on something of massive constitutional significance. And it’s inconceivable that [1.] and [2.] could satisfactorily be completed ahead of TMay’s requesting something of the EU. (Even [1.] will take a little time. And as for [2.], MPs need fully to understand the options and the voting system at every stage.) But a year’s extension would provide plenty of time to follow such a plan deliberatively, and time also for a confirmatory public vote (should this prove to be wanted – a question which Parliament might actually debate).
Of course a g.e. would interfere with such a plan. But if anyone’s serious about achieving compromise, and if May is prepared to settle for such plan, then no-one should be striving to get a g.e. – yet. If the plan is accepted by the EU and there were a g.e. before long, that would be a fact the EU had to confront. But it can’t belong in any plan.
One can't be optimistic about TMay going to the EU with a plan in which Government allows Parliamentary votes to determine the upshot. But TMay’s more or less put herself at the mercy of Parliament. And it's a plan "to deliver Brexit". And maybe she’d like to be able to blame MPs collectively if the plan doesn’t turn up trumps. She could say that she’d taken the side of democracy.
https://twitter.com/vote_leave/status/741363396550000640
Does UKIP or the ERG count?
I disagree- Brexit is just starting - and it’s going to see a realignment in British politics. Which is much needed.
Anyone thinks Westminster can cancel Brexit without massive repercussions is delusional.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-06/bill-shorten-says-scott-morrison-playing-games-election-date/10978324
https://twitter.com/FrankmcnallyIT/status/1114102594866241536
Worth recalling Hulkenberg started 17th and was on course to finish about 6th (before his electrics died). Even bearing in mind his good start, that supports Raikkonen's view.
Also makes Gasly look a bit poor.
Although TBH that was the de facto question in the first one. It's just that most people didn't expect the answer we got.
If Remain had won the last one I would be campaigning for a party to put another one/leaving without one in their manifesto, but wouldnt expect one because of the opinion of a panel of political geeks
Does Hannan support the WDA ?
At least we will see the end of national referendums. No one will want to repeat the exercise.
https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2019/04/daniel-hannan-we-are-shuffling-towards-a-deal-that-is-worse-either-than-remaining-or-leaving.html
The question should be Remain or Leave .
A two stage referendum held a week apart .
If the public vote to leave then you then should have two choices
Canada plus
Mays deal
But the ERG will have to put out a plan and explain their solution on NI in terms of Canada .
https://www.wndu.com/content/news/Buttigieg-to-make-appearance-on-Meet-the-Press-Sunday-508182981.html
There's a certain type of left-wing Leaver who thinks bringing down capitalism would be a feature not a bug of Brexit.
Conversely there's a certain type of Remainer who thinks discouraging the proles from ever voting again would be a feature not a bug of Revoking Brexit.
Surely these EU elections are the free-est of free hits against the never less popular establishment?
In fairness, that's an extremely persuasive view.
Worth re-reading Hannan's Brexit fan fiction btw
https://reaction.life/britain-looks-like-brexit/
So pass the WA, leave, choose a Brexiteer leader, win a GE with max divergence in the manifesto.
Robert is your father's brother.
I am hoping for some LD and Green gains, and a clearout of the kippers, I don't think they will replicate 2014.
People will vote Tory - or not - and they would only need 8 per cent of the vote to win one seat. Frankly the only south east region MEP the majority of voters could name is Nigel Farage - its a party vote not a personal one.
Actually, the original saying was about Bob being his mother's brother.
*Pedant hat OFF*
As for "We were told, " you must not believe smarmy old Etonians who con you into thinking they can rewrite the constitution by press release. They can't.
One suspects they'd be making a better fist of leaving the EU than the frontbench charlatans.
Effectively, it's arguable that the Tories thus have no new competitors to contend with, whereas TIG has appeared on the progressive wing and, if it achieves any kind of success, this is likely to have a disproportionate effect on Labour.
So, in short, if he stands again and is high enough up their list then he ought to get back in without too much trouble. But I stand to be disproved by events.
" In one place, a staff member stood guard so I could go into the ladies to change him."
But often that isn't really an alternative when you're on your own with a child. And some women aren't exactly welcoming of a man with a baby or young child at times - but that's a different story ...
Fortunately, more and more places are having unisex toilets with baby changing (often combined disabled toilet), and stay-at-home dads are being more common.
https://twitter.com/SteveBakerHW/status/1114466874572640256
Reminds me a bit of a related topic, a news segment about lack of disabled toilets in most places (with IKEA singled out as an excellent exception).
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1114516511702564864
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1114516654606700545