The Raabites seem to be going very much for Boris, which isn't much of a surprise (see Guardian live blog). Perhaps the vote totals of the other contenders won't change much this time round.
Those who appear to share his low standards of personal morality appear to be rallying to him - Michael Fallon and Damian Green who were both casualties of the Sex Pests affair. Then there is Andrea Jenkyns who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP.
"... who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP."
The only bastard is you.
I assure you I was not born out of wedlock.
'Bastard' has many meanings. You are choosing to use a rather archaic one - and one which many of your co-religionists would disagree with. I chose to brand you with the everyday meaning.
The child is innocent. It is not his or her fault that the parents were not married when he was conceived. He should not be called derogatory names because of it. Ezekiel 18:19-20 comes to mind.
I agree totally that the child is innocent - and have said so on many occasions both on here and elsewhere. My condemnation is very much related to the parents - and the selfishness inherent in their conduct.
9 Then Jesus told this story to some who had great confidence in their own righteousness and scorned everyone else: 10 “Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a despised tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer[a]: ‘I thank you, God, that I am not like other people—cheaters, sinners, adulterers. I’m certainly not like that tax collector! 12 I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.’
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, ‘O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.’ 14 I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
So, has the number of Labour MPs who insist we must Brexit but who will actually lift a finger to see it happen actually gone up yet with Corbyn's latest maneuvers?
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
Now there will be a multitude of factors affecting this but it does make me wonder whether the single market has been good for the UK economy.
Do I have all the answers to this ? Certainly not, I don't even have all the questions. But I'm certain there is a major problem here and its a problem many other PBers are in denial about.
Jesus fucking Christ. There is a problem you believe which is a trade deficit with the EU. You have no idea if it is a problem you just think it is and you think that if we leave the EU you can solve it. And you keep on banging on about it as if leaving the EU is the silver bullet and yet by your own admission you have no fucking clue whether or why or how it is a problem and what would solve it?
How do you think a trade deficit occurs? Because people here buy more stuff from abroad than people abroad buy stuff from us. There's a quick primer for you.
So how are you going to solve it by leaving the EU? Or FFS STFU with your trite "trade deficit" one liners.
The collapse in the £ after the Brexit vote has surely made it worse, at least in the short to medium term.
I see Jezza has come up with a new condition before he will back a referendum. Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and say it has to be held in a month beginning with W and has 6 sundays.
Now there will be a multitude of factors affecting this but it does make me wonder whether the single market has been good for the UK economy.
Do I have all the answers to this ? Certainly not, I don't even have all the questions. But I'm certain there is a major problem here and its a problem many other PBers are in denial about.
Jesus fucking Christ. There is a problem you believe which is a trade deficit with the EU. You have no idea if it is a problem you just think it is and you think that if we leave the EU you can solve it. And you keep on banging on about it as if leaving the EU is the silver bullet and yet by your own admission you have no fucking clue whether or why or how it is a problem and what would solve it?
How do you think a trade deficit occurs? Because people here buy more stuff from abroad than people abroad buy stuff from us. There's a quick primer for you.
So how are you going to solve it by leaving the EU? Or FFS STFU with your trite "trade deficit" one liners.
22 years of consecutive trade deficit.
Perhaps you should Robert Smithson how the UK's net assets have changed during that period and then think if that trend can continue permanently.
But its so much easier to ignore problems and rant against anyone who asks questions.
The Raabites seem to be going very much for Boris, which isn't much of a surprise (see Guardian live blog). Perhaps the vote totals of the other contenders won't change much this time round.
Those who appear to share his low standards of personal morality appear to be rallying to him - Michael Fallon and Damian Green who were both casualties of the Sex Pests affair. Then there is Andrea Jenkyns who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP.
"... who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP."
The only bastard is you.
I assure you I was not born out of wedlock.
'Bastard' has many meanings. You are choosing to use a rather archaic one - and one which many of your co-religionists would disagree with. I chose to brand you with the everyday meaning.
The child is innocent. It is not his or her fault that the parents were not married when he was conceived. He should not be called derogatory names because of it. Ezekiel 18:19-20 comes to mind.
I agree totally that the child is innocent - and have said so on many occasions both on here and elsewhere. My condemnation is very much related to the parents - and the selfishness inherent in their conduct.
I see Jezza has come up with a new condition before he will back a referendum. Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and say it has to be held in a month beginning with W and has 6 sundays.
What government policy is the Leader of the Opposition opposing?
26 labour mps do not like it. Sky now reporting on their letter and their demand to leave by the 31st October
Indeed. Interesting to see how that will play out. Wonder why they didn't vote for the WA? Because to quote a great (about to be) former PM "nothing has changed".
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
The Raabites seem to be going very much for Boris, which isn't much of a surprise (see Guardian live blog). Perhaps the vote totals of the other contenders won't change much this time round.
Those who appear to share his low standards of personal morality appear to be rallying to him - Michael Fallon and Damian Green who were both casualties of the Sex Pests affair. Then there is Andrea Jenkyns who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP.
"... who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP."
The only bastard is you.
I assure you I was not born out of wedlock.
'Bastard' has many meanings. You are choosing to use a rather archaic one - and one which many of your co-religionists would disagree with. I chose to brand you with the everyday meaning.
The child is innocent. It is not his or her fault that the parents were not married when he was conceived. He should not be called derogatory names because of it. Ezekiel 18:19-20 comes to mind.
I agree totally that the child is innocent - and have said so on many occasions both on here and elsewhere. My condemnation is very much related to the parents - and the selfishness inherent in their conduct.
9 Then Jesus told this story to some who had great confidence in their own righteousness and scorned everyone else: 10 “Two men went to the Temple to pray. One was a Pharisee, and the other was a despised tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed this prayer[a]: ‘I thank you, God, that I am not like other people—cheaters, sinners, adulterers. I’m certainly not like that tax collector! 12 I fast twice a week, and I give you a tenth of my income.’
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, ‘O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.’ 14 I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
I think Justin is more of a fan of the rather sterner God who sent a pair of she-bears to maul 42 children who made fun of Elijah for going bald.
Now there will be a multitude of factors affecting this but it does make me wonder whether the single market has been good for the UK economy.
Do I have all the answers to this ? Certainly not, I don't even have all the questions. But I'm certain there is a major problem here and its a problem many other PBers are in denial about.
Jesus fucking Christ. There is a problem you believe which is a trade deficit with the EU. You have no idea if it is a problem you just think it is and you think that if we leave the EU you can solve it. And you keep on banging on about it as if leaving the EU is the silver bullet and yet by your own admission you have no fucking clue whether or why or how it is a problem and what would solve it?
How do you think a trade deficit occurs? Because people here buy more stuff from abroad than people abroad buy stuff from us. There's a quick primer for you.
So how are you going to solve it by leaving the EU? Or FFS STFU with your trite "trade deficit" one liners.
The collapse in the £ after the Brexit vote has surely made it worse, at least in the short to medium term.
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
Now there will be a multitude of factors affecting this but it does make me wonder whether the single market has been good for the UK economy.
Do I have all the answers to this ? Certainly not, I don't even have all the questions. But I'm certain there is a major problem here and its a problem many other PBers are in denial about.
Jesus fucking Christ. There is a problem you believe which is a trade deficit with the EU. You have no idea if it is a problem you just think it is and you think that if we leave the EU you can solve it. And you keep on banging on about it as if leaving the EU is the silver bullet and yet by your own admission you have no fucking clue whether or why or how it is a problem and what would solve it?
How do you think a trade deficit occurs? Because people here buy more stuff from abroad than people abroad buy stuff from us. There's a quick primer for you.
So how are you going to solve it by leaving the EU? Or FFS STFU with your trite "trade deficit" one liners.
22 years of consecutive trade deficit.
Perhaps you should Robert Smithson how the UK's net assets have changed during that period and then think if that trend can continue permanently.
But its so much easier to ignore problems and rant against anyone who asks questions.
Can you please explain to me how the EU has affected our balance of trade and what you think leaving will do to change things.
I see Jezza has come up with a new condition before he will back a referendum. Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and say it has to be held in a month beginning with W and has 6 sundays.
What government policy is the Leader of the Opposition opposing?
Banning the Labour yellow star policy for Jewish party members ?!?
I see Jezza has come up with a new condition before he will back a referendum. Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and say it has to be held in a month beginning with W and has 6 sundays.
In truth there is just the one condition - the clear commitment will be made in the event of an election. Otherwise it will be hedged.
This is the right approach IMO for the Opposition.
If they were in government, different story. But to get into government there must be an election. And if there is they will make the Ref commitment. Loop back to start of post.
26 labour mps do not like it. Sky now reporting on their letter and their demand to leave by the 31st October
Indeed. Interesting to see how that will play out. Wonder why they didn't vote for the WA? Because to quote a great (about to be) former PM "nothing has changed".
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
And lose their seats and labour its chance to govern
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
They will
Why would they now, when they, along with everyone else, was told the WA was at its final chance and the alternative was no Brexit, and they still mostly voted against it.
And it doesn't matter as since the Tory leadership hopefuls are committed to changing it, they won't vote for it again.
26 labour mps do not like it. Sky now reporting on their letter and their demand to leave by the 31st October
Indeed. Interesting to see how that will play out. Wonder why they didn't vote for the WA? Because to quote a great (about to be) former PM "nothing has changed".
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
Its often easier to be against something than for something irrespective of whatever the current 'something' is.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Yes, that is how I see it. I am a little scared of Johnson though. He does have appeal, amazingly.
I see Jezza has come up with a new condition before he will back a referendum. Why doesn't he just go the whole hog and say it has to be held in a month beginning with W and has 6 sundays.
In truth there is just the one condition - the clear commitment will be made in the event of an election. Otherwise it will be hedged.
This is the right approach IMO for the Opposition.
If they were in government, different story. But to get into government there must be an election. And if there is they will make the Ref commitment. Loop back to start of post.
And lose it. Labour needs leave seats and their mps will be lost if labour back a referendum, hence Corbyn fudging like mad
The Raabites seem to be going very much for Boris, which isn't much of a surprise (see Guardian live blog). Perhaps the vote totals of the other contenders won't change much this time round.
Those who appear to share his low standards of personal morality appear to be rallying to him - Michael Fallon and Damian Green who were both casualties of the Sex Pests affair. Then there is Andrea Jenkyns who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP.
"... who had a bastard before marrying a fellow Tory MP."
The only bastard is you.
I assure you I was not born out of wedlock.
'Bastard' has many meanings. You are choosing to use a rather archaic one - and one which many of your co-religionists would disagree with. I chose to brand you with the everyday meaning.
The child is innocent. It is not his or her fault that the parents were not married when he was conceived. He should not be called derogatory names because of it. Ezekiel 18:19-20 comes to mind.
I agree totally that the child is innocent - and have said so on many occasions both on here and elsewhere. My condemnation is very much related to the parents - and the selfishness inherent in their conduct.
26 labour mps do not like it. Sky now reporting on their letter and their demand to leave by the 31st October
Indeed. Interesting to see how that will play out. Wonder why they didn't vote for the WA? Because to quote a great (about to be) former PM "nothing has changed".
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
And lose their seats and labour its chance to govern
even if Labour have a 2nd referendum manifesto pledge it doesn't mean northern leave seats are lost. Most of their current vote is probably remain anyway and a resurgent Brexit party might take as many votes from the Tories as from Labour.
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
They will
Why would they now, when they, along with everyone else, was told the WA was at its final chance and the alternative was no Brexit, and they still mostly voted against it.
And it doesn't matter as since the Tory leadership hopefuls are committed to changing it, they won't vote for it again.
I see this ending with Boris fudging a PD and getting it past with the 26 labour mps or even more backing it
26 labour mps do not like it. Sky now reporting on their letter and their demand to leave by the 31st October
Indeed. Interesting to see how that will play out. Wonder why they didn't vote for the WA? Because to quote a great (about to be) former PM "nothing has changed".
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
And lose their seats and labour its chance to govern
even if Labour have a 2nd referendum manifesto pledge it doesn't mean northern leave seats are lost. Most of their current vote is probably remain anyway and a resurgent Brexit party might take as many votes from the Tories as from Labour.
Yet another pointless Vox pop on PM. The public is split on Brexit, surprise! Labour voters are split, Tory voters are split. We know. What purpose does it serve?
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Yes, that is how I see it. I am a little scared of Johnson though. He does have appeal, amazingly.
I think he is aware of his own limitations. How could he not be I hear you say!
As PM he'll most likely find some good civil servants he can lean on. Whatever he is he's not messianic.
I think he will be PM, and I think overall he'll not be too bad.
1. is probably right (although more Indys would have hit the LDs also). Certainly the Tories would have been crucified if up against BXP council candidates as well.
2. is an overstatement. Of course the LibDems bounced back hardest in areas of past strength - which have the organisation and voter memory - but the reason they were able to do so well was significantly down to Brexit. Ask anyone in Chelmsford, or indeed most of Surrey
6. is somewhat complacent - the Euro election pattern doesn't need to be replicated in full for the two old parties to take a significant hit
7. may be right, but it's a question of the damage already being done rather than the opportunity not having been there in the first place, as the 2017 GE demonstrated
8. ditto. That your positioning is wrong doesn't necessarily mean a change is beneficial, since the people unhappy with the change are generally more willing to vote elsewhere than those pleased are to switch to you.
coughs politely and wonders whether Labour have noticed that Penistone and Stocksbridge no longer has a Labour MP.......
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Yes, that is how I see it. I am a little scared of Johnson though. He does have appeal, amazingly.
But isn't it based predominantly on his clownish aspects? Not the best qualification.
Now there will be a multitude of factors affecting this but it does make me wonder whether the single market has been good for the UK economy.
Do I have all the answers to this ? Certainly not, I don't even have all the questions. But I'm certain there is a major problem here and its a problem many other PBers are in denial about.
Jesus fucking Christ. There is a problem you believe which is a trade deficit with the EU. You have no idea if it is a problem you just think it is and you think that if we leave the EU you can solve it. And you keep on banging on about it as if leaving the EU is the silver bullet and yet by your own admission you have no fucking clue whether or why or how it is a problem and what would solve it?
How do you think a trade deficit occurs? Because people here buy more stuff from abroad than people abroad buy stuff from us. There's a quick primer for you.
So how are you going to solve it by leaving the EU? Or FFS STFU with your trite "trade deficit" one liners.
22 years of consecutive trade deficit.
Perhaps you should Robert Smithson how the UK's net assets have changed during that period and then think if that trend can continue permanently.
But its so much easier to ignore problems and rant against anyone who asks questions.
Can you please explain to me how the EU has affected our balance of trade and what you think leaving will do to change things.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Most seats and party providing the PM could be two different things come next election
Now there will be a multitude of factors affecting this but it does make me wonder whether the single market has been good for the UK economy.
Do I have all the answers to this ? Certainly not, I don't even have all the questions. But I'm certain there is a major problem here and its a problem many other PBers are in denial about.
Jesus fucking Christ. There is a problem you believe which is a trade deficit with the EU. You have no idea if it is a problem you just think it is and you think that if we leave the EU you can solve it. And you keep on banging on about it as if leaving the EU is the silver bullet and yet by your own admission you have no fucking clue whether or why or how it is a problem and what would solve it?
How do you think a trade deficit occurs? Because people here buy more stuff from abroad than people abroad buy stuff from us. There's a quick primer for you.
So how are you going to solve it by leaving the EU? Or FFS STFU with your trite "trade deficit" one liners.
22 years of consecutive trade deficit.
Perhaps you should Robert Smithson how the UK's net assets have changed during that period and then think if that trend can continue permanently.
But its so much easier to ignore problems and rant against anyone who asks questions.
Can you please explain to me how the EU has affected our balance of trade and what you think leaving will do to change things.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
So what measures would you like to see introduced which would address that?
I mean it needs to be said that nearly half our trade is with the EU. So we might be in a bee stings ice cream situation here.
Liz Truss on PM following Raab on WATO in outlining Boris' policy for him. We are leaving on October 31 no ifs no buts. The EU, faced with such.resolution will hastily fold, most likely. His refusal to be interviewed is allowing everyone to project their own views onto him. It is a Corbynite Brexit strategy.
Except that the requirements of being in government will collapse the superposition a good deal more quickly.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
If you look at countries around the world, trade deficits are a function of household savings rates. High household savings rate (Germany, Switzerland or Singapore) -> trade surplus. Low household savings rate (UK or US) -> trade deficit.
Countries which have gone from trade deficit to surplus (like Spain), have done so largely through increasing household savings rates. Sometimes this is done by increasing exports and the surplus not being spent. Sometimes it is done by suppressing consumption. And sometimes it's a mix of the two.
It's important to appreciate that British people don't demand EU "things". They demand things where the cheapest supply is from the EU.
Take wine. If we left the EU and entered into a free trade agreement with Australia/NZ, the chances are that Brits would drink almost exactly the same amount of wine as before, it's just that the changing tariffs would mean that we bought less French wine, and more Australian. Our trade balance wouldn't change, unless we either (a) started producing more wine (which would of course mean diverting agricultural land from other uses, probably netting us back at zero), or (b) drank less wine.
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
They will
Why would they now, when they, along with everyone else, was told the WA was at its final chance and the alternative was no Brexit, and they still mostly voted against it.
And it doesn't matter as since the Tory leadership hopefuls are committed to changing it, they won't vote for it again.
I see this ending with Boris fudging a PD and getting it past with the 26 labour mps or even more backing it
The chances of that sort of thing happening has been overpredicted every single time. You can see the release the Tories feel at not needing to vote for the WA again, I don't see that Boris can save it, not when he thinks it so terrible and promising th eBakers of the world we will leave with something better.
I still don't understand the reasoning behind that. On a political calculation, shouldn't it be better for Johnson if he faces his softest opponent on Brexit, rather than someone who can compete for the Brexiteer vote?
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
They will
Why would they now, when they, along with everyone else, was told the WA was at its final chance and the alternative was no Brexit, and they still mostly voted against it.
And it doesn't matter as since the Tory leadership hopefuls are committed to changing it, they won't vote for it again.
I see this ending with Boris fudging a PD and getting it past with the 26 labour mps or even more backing it
The chances of that sort of thing happening has been overpredicted every single time. You can see the release the Tories feel at not needing to vote for the WA again, I don't see that Boris can save it, not when he thinks it so terrible and promising th eBakers of the world we will leave with something better.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
If you look at countries around the world, trade deficits are a function of household savings rates. High household savings rate (Germany, Switzerland or Singapore) -> trade surplus. Low household savings rate (UK or US) -> trade deficit.
Countries which have gone from trade deficit to surplus (like Spain), have done so largely through increasing household savings rates. Sometimes this is done by increasing exports and the surplus not being spent. Sometimes it is done by suppressing consumption. And sometimes it's a mix of the two.
It's important to appreciate that British people don't demand EU "things". They demand things where the cheapest supply is from the EU.
Take wine. If we left the EU and entered into a free trade agreement with Australia/NZ, the chances are that Brits would drink almost exactly the same amount of wine as before, it's just that the changing tariffs would mean that we bought less French wine, and more Australian. Our trade balance wouldn't change, unless we either (a) started producing more wine (which would of course mean diverting agricultural land from other uses, probably netting us back at zero), or (b) drank less wine.
If we go no deal and the £ collapses further, only Topping will be able to afford wine.
I still don't understand the reasoning behind that. On a political calculation, shouldn't it be better for Johnson if he faces his softest opponent on Brexit, rather than someone who can compete for the Brexiteer vote?
Stewart will spend a whole month putting Boris’s reputation through the mincer, and he’ll do it very well too and get a lot of publicity for it.
Boris doesn’t want to be a lame duck before he starts.
Perhaps you should Robert Smithson how the UK's net assets have changed during that period and then think if that trend can continue permanently.
But its so much easier to ignore problems and rant against anyone who asks questions.
Can you please explain to me how the EU has affected our balance of trade and what you think leaving will do to change things.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
So what measures would you like to see introduced which would address that?
I'd like to see the country to live within its means, I'd like to see politicians stop promising tax cuts and spending increases, I'd like to see incentives to save rather than spend, I'd like to see more affordable housing, I'd like to see the trade balance reported in the news, I'd like to see attempts to boost productivity, increase exports and encourage wealth creation.
I still don't understand the reasoning behind that. On a political calculation, shouldn't it be better for Johnson if he faces his softest opponent on Brexit, rather than someone who can compete for the Brexiteer vote?
If I were Boris, the opponent I'd like the least is Hunt and the opponent I'd like the most is Javid.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
If you look at countries around the world, trade deficits are a function of household savings rates. High household savings rate (Germany, Switzerland or Singapore) -> trade surplus. Low household savings rate (UK or US) -> trade deficit.
Countries which have gone from trade deficit to surplus (like Spain), have done so largely through increasing household savings rates. Sometimes this is done by increasing exports and the surplus not being spent. Sometimes it is done by suppressing consumption. And sometimes it's a mix of the two.
It's important to appreciate that British people don't demand EU "things". They demand things where the cheapest supply is from the EU.
Take wine. If we left the EU and entered into a free trade agreement with Australia/NZ, the chances are that Brits would drink almost exactly the same amount of wine as before, it's just that the changing tariffs would mean that we bought less French wine, and more Australian. Our trade balance wouldn't change, unless we either (a) started producing more wine (which would of course mean diverting agricultural land from other uses, probably netting us back at zero), or (b) drank less wine.
Just to add: countries with high levels of home ownership, and where house prices have risen historically tend also to run trade deficits*. Why? Because people feel they don't need to save because they have assets at the "Bank of Bricks & Mortar".
* Spain is an interesting example of this. Prices went through the roof, people felt rich. They spent beyond their means. The trade deficit shot up. House prices came down, and suddenly people had to save to compensate. Result, the trade deficit narrowed sharply.
Better it were done quickly. Those expecting the great Corbyn pivot moment will wait a long time, IMO. There are two things to note about Corbyn 1/ he is a longstanding eurosceptic; 2/ he never changes.
1. Block any Tory Brexit. 2. Thus force general election. 3. Offer Ref/Remain in the manifesto for that election. 4. Win it.
This (IMO) is the Labour gameplan.
And I like it. Can't fault it actually.
Agreed. And this is why I think Labour should be Favs for most seats in the next election. Their issues are easier to solve than the Tory's are. Or at least are largely within their control.
Not according to the '26' today who look as if they will vote for a WDA in order to leave on the 31st October
In their letter they say they want the party to get behind a deal. they haven't said they would defy the party and back one.
They will
Why would they now, when they, along with everyone else, was told the WA was at its final chance and the alternative was no Brexit, and they still mostly voted against it.
And it doesn't matter as since the Tory leadership hopefuls are committed to changing it, they won't vote for it again.
I see this ending with Boris fudging a PD and getting it past with the 26 labour mps or even more backing it
26 labour mps do not like it. Sky now reporting on their letter and their demand to leave by the 31st October
Indeed. Interesting to see how that will play out. Wonder why they didn't vote for the WA? Because to quote a great (about to be) former PM "nothing has changed".
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
And lose their seats and labour its chance to govern
even if Labour have a 2nd referendum manifesto pledge it doesn't mean northern leave seats are lost. Most of their current vote is probably remain anyway and a resurgent Brexit party might take as many votes from the Tories as from Labour.
There’s a thread on Twitter today that says exactly that - even in the most leave seat Labours vote tends towards remain...
Could they not do the whole thing at once with STV or would that not be esxciting enough?
You've answered your own question.
Also, in fairness, a least a few days or weeks for this phase allows relative outsiders to develop a plan and support, or for relative frontrunners to reveal they cannot handle even slight pressure.
Yet another pointless Vox pop on PM. The public is split on Brexit, surprise! Labour voters are split, Tory voters are split. We know. What purpose does it serve?
VoxPops are universally awful, just an inane way of filling airtime. See also: Laura K. BBC News really is hopeless these days.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
If you look at countries around the world, trade deficits are a function of household savings rates. High household savings rate (Germany, Switzerland or Singapore) -> trade surplus. Low household savings rate (UK or US) -> trade deficit.
Countries which have gone from trade deficit to surplus (like Spain), have done so largely through increasing household savings rates. Sometimes this is done by increasing exports and the surplus not being spent. Sometimes it is done by suppressing consumption. And sometimes it's a mix of the two.
It's important to appreciate that British people don't demand EU "things". They demand things where the cheapest supply is from the EU.
Take wine. If we left the EU and entered into a free trade agreement with Australia/NZ, the chances are that Brits would drink almost exactly the same amount of wine as before, it's just that the changing tariffs would mean that we bought less French wine, and more Australian. Our trade balance wouldn't change, unless we either (a) started producing more wine (which would of course mean diverting agricultural land from other uses, probably netting us back at zero), or (b) drank less wine.
I understand all that but what happens if the UK savings rate doesn't increase - if we continue to over-consume ?
Because I don't see any willingness for that to change.
What's the end result if we continue to have a huge balance of payments deficit ?
I can't remember the data you've mentioned previously about how the UK's net foreign assets have changed but how long can that trend continue and where will we be in another ten or twenty years ?
Of course if we didn't have a free trade in wine with either the EU or with Aus/NZ then we would likely either drink less wine and/or replace it with either UK wine and beer - the import substitution which PB's alanbrooke is an advocate of.
I tried to explain my musings earlier in a reply to JJ.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
If you look at countries around the world, trade deficits are a function of household savings rates. High household savings rate (Germany, Switzerland or Singapore) -> trade surplus. Low household savings rate (UK or US) -> trade deficit.
Countries which have gone from trade deficit to surplus (like Spain), have done so largely through increasing household savings rates. Sometimes this is done by increasing exports and the surplus not being spent. Sometimes it is done by suppressing consumption. And sometimes it's a mix of the two.
It's important to appreciate that British people don't demand EU "things". They demand things where the cheapest supply is from the EU.
Take wine. If we left the EU and entered into a free trade agreement with Australia/NZ, the chances are that Brits would drink almost exactly the same amount of wine as before, it's just that the changing tariffs would mean that we bought less French wine, and more Australian. Our trade balance wouldn't change, unless we either (a) started producing more wine (which would of course mean diverting agricultural land from other uses, probably netting us back at zero), or (b) drank less wine.
Just to add: countries with high levels of home ownership, and where house prices have risen historically tend also to run trade deficits*. Why? Because people feel they don't need to save because they have assets at the "Bank of Bricks & Mortar".
* Spain is an interesting example of this. Prices went through the roof, people felt rich. They spent beyond their means. The trade deficit shot up. House prices came down, and suddenly people had to save to compensate. Result, the trade deficit narrowed sharply.
Or we might drink ale rather than foreign grape juice!
A number of people not really fully behind him wanted to see how he'd do in the debate, weren't particularly impressed, and went back to their preferred candidate.
Comments
13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance and dared not even lift his eyes to heaven as he prayed. Instead, he beat his chest in sorrow, saying, ‘O God, be merciful to me, for I am a sinner.’ 14 I tell you, this sinner, not the Pharisee, returned home justified before God. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
Has Rory been crowned emperor of the Tories yet?
Johnson 140
Jeremy 49
Michael 46
Sajid 40
Rory 38
Perhaps you should Robert Smithson how the UK's net assets have changed during that period and then think if that trend can continue permanently.
But its so much easier to ignore problems and rant against anyone who asks questions.
Personally, I think they are on shaky ground prioritizing delivering Brexit over the election of a Labour government.
Predict they will toe the line when the crunch comes.
What I think was more concerning is how the balance of payments and even more so the trade balance became 'stuck' in permanent deficit.
Previously there had been something of a sine curve pattern as the economic cycle progressed.
This is the right approach IMO for the Opposition.
If they were in government, different story. But to get into government there must be an election. And if there is they will make the Ref commitment. Loop back to start of post.
And it doesn't matter as since the Tory leadership hopefuls are committed to changing it, they won't vote for it again.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2017
The marriage status of parents is a pretty poor guide to their ‘selfishness’, or any other particular quality, in contemporary Britain.
Had to look that up. Juche. Learnt something there.
Yes, I see what you mean - under Kim Jong Johnson. What a thought.
Still, what matters is what they think. We will see - assuming we do get that election, which is by no means a certainty.
As PM he'll most likely find some good civil servants he can lean on. Whatever he is he's not messianic.
I think he will be PM, and I think overall he'll not be too bad.
Prediction:
Johnson 137
Hunt 48
Gove 46
Javid 42
Stewart 40
I expect Tory MPs to manoeuvre to block Stewart.
The data shows that the UK trade deficit is primarily about trade with the EU and that this is a deficit which has greatly increased during the last two decades.
Perhaps that means that because of the faults and failings of the UK economy / UK society generally / UK politicians that we are fundamentally unsuited to being in a single market with countries which do not have the same problems.
I mean it needs to be said that nearly half our trade is with the EU. So we might be in a bee stings ice cream situation here.
Boris 146
Hunt 46
Gove 48
Javid 39
Stewart 34
(most to Boris, some to Gove, peak Stewart)
PS Total guess, just in case anyone imagines I wasn't joking
Countries which have gone from trade deficit to surplus (like Spain), have done so largely through increasing household savings rates. Sometimes this is done by increasing exports and the surplus not being spent. Sometimes it is done by suppressing consumption. And sometimes it's a mix of the two.
It's important to appreciate that British people don't demand EU "things". They demand things where the cheapest supply is from the EU.
Take wine. If we left the EU and entered into a free trade agreement with Australia/NZ, the chances are that Brits would drink almost exactly the same amount of wine as before, it's just that the changing tariffs would mean that we bought less French wine, and more Australian. Our trade balance wouldn't change, unless we either (a) started producing more wine (which would of course mean diverting agricultural land from other uses, probably netting us back at zero), or (b) drank less wine.
There was a recent Korean drama called The Crowned Clown.
Boris doesn’t want to be a lame duck before he starts.
But I've given up hope on seeing that.
I'd settle for putting Robert Smithson in charge.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics
Way too long.
* Spain is an interesting example of this. Prices went through the roof, people felt rich. They spent beyond their means. The trade deficit shot up. House prices came down, and suddenly people had to save to compensate. Result, the trade deficit narrowed sharply.
Yes?
Also, in fairness, a least a few days or weeks for this phase allows relative outsiders to develop a plan and support, or for relative frontrunners to reveal they cannot handle even slight pressure.
VoxPops are universally awful, just an inane way of filling airtime. See also: Laura K. BBC News really is hopeless these days.
Johnson 143
Hunt 54
Gove 51
Javid 38
Stewart 27
Because I don't see any willingness for that to change.
What's the end result if we continue to have a huge balance of payments deficit ?
I can't remember the data you've mentioned previously about how the UK's net foreign assets have changed but how long can that trend continue and where will we be in another ten or twenty years ?
Of course if we didn't have a free trade in wine with either the EU or with Aus/NZ then we would likely either drink less wine and/or replace it with either UK wine and beer - the import substitution which PB's alanbrooke is an advocate of.
How did Rory lose ten votes?
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/1141391652088614918
Hunt 54
Javid 38
Johnson 143
Stewart 27
Stewart eliminated