I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
"the difference is that the hypothesis has to be falsifiable."
That used to be the case in theory. Science should try to prove the hypothesis is false, but sometimes grants and careers are built om maintaining the hypothesis.
That's why it doesn't always work that way. Outside my expertise, but didn't string theory become popular without being falsifiable?
A criticism levelled by numerous physicists. On the other hand it is very popular with mathematicians, as it has lead to many developments in pure mathematics, so it will continue to be an active area of research.
And it is not inconceivable that it might one day be testable.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
It was sensible to reorient the payments towards smaller farmers in struggling or remote communities and those doing the 'right thing' in terms of welfare or the environment. But the large Tory landowners made sure any change was pished well back into the long grass.
Amazing how we all fall for the same hysteria every electoral cycle. We should remind ourselves that the minority government has somehow managed to limp on for 2 years. That means we're halfway through the parliament. Barring the three times the government has changed hands in the last 40 years, it's inevitable that an opposition party has overtaken the government in polls halfway through the parliament only for the government to stage a recovery at the election.
The idea that BXP or LDs is going to form a govt is for the birds. Even if there was an election in the next six months, disrupting the electoral cycle, the FPTP system combined with the financial and organisational clout of the major parties would give LD/BXP a run for their money.
Probably. Nevertheless it would be lolz if in studying the leadership election for next PM we are looking in the wrong place.
As well as his key commitment to Leave the EU with No Deal and go to WTO terms Nigel Farage promises to abolish interest rates on student loans, scrap HS2 and halve overseas aid use the savings to fund £200 billion of economic development outside London at a rally in Birmingham today.
He also unveiled the first 100 Brexit Party Parliamentary candidates selected ready for any snap general election.
"the difference is that the hypothesis has to be falsifiable."
That used to be the case in theory. Science should try to prove the hypothesis is false, but sometimes grants and careers are built om maintaining the hypothesis.
That's why it doesn't always work that way. Outside my expertise, but didn't string theory become popular without being falsifiable?
That is simply bad science, of which there is plenty.
String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
It was sensible to reorient the payments towards smaller farmers in struggling or remote communities and those doing the 'right thing' in terms of welfare or the environment. But the large Tory landowners made sure any change was pished well back into the long grass.
I thought they were pushed beyond 2020 rather than further out?
"the difference is that the hypothesis has to be falsifiable."
That used to be the case in theory. Science should try to prove the hypothesis is false, but sometimes grants and careers are built om maintaining the hypothesis.
That's why it doesn't always work that way. Outside my expertise, but didn't string theory become popular without being falsifiable?
That is simply bad science, of which there is plenty.
String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested.
Might take a while, though. Took a century for gravitational waves.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Dr. Foxy, if the evidence points to a theory being wrong, the theory gets amended or discarded (or should be). That's science. In religion, the conclusion (God exists, better worship him) persists regardless of evidence.
I agree that religion does not require concrete evidence. That is the basis of faith. Religious inspiration and experience is an inward phenomenon not an external one.
Refuting or proving religion by hypothesis testing is simply the wrong tool for the job, as futile as understanding the meaning of a painting by chemically analysing the pigment.
Chemically analysing the pigment can be important, because it can reveal how the pigment may have changed since the painting was created, and therefore prevent one from misinterpreting the painting on the basis of its present appearance.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Boris knows how to read an audience, he still will have my vote this week
"String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested."
It may be elegant mathematics, but bringing in half a dozen dimensions to make it work falls foul of Ockham's razor. And I don't think it is falsifiable. Scientists are just as prone to whimsy as non-scientists.
We know less about the world than we used to - we keep discovering new unknowns.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
Few things as dispiriting as seeing someone thoroughly beaten. Remember video of Ted Cruz making calls for people to back Trump? Hes not even a likeable guy but he just looked broken.
That was a hypothetical poll based on the Tories not yet having delivered Brexit and Labour not yet having backed EUref2
So the situation for a September /October election?
Suits me!
The poll wins a prize for leading questions - I've never seen a poll that had quite so much hypothetical explanation leading into each question. The effect is to ask respondents to treat an election purely on the basis of EU policy, which as we saw in 2017 doesn't actually work.
That said, I concede that the LibDems are in good shape!
"String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested."
It may be elegant mathematics, but bringing in half a dozen dimensions to make it work falls foul of Ockham's razor. And I don't think it is falsifiable. Scientists are just as prone to whimsy as non-scientists.
We know less about the world than we used to - we keep discovering new unknowns.
M theory has been proven much like Newton "discovered" gravity - we have proposed a model which explains observed phenomena.
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
Given the latest ConHome Tory members poll last week had it Boris 66%, Hunt 30% and 4% undecided (and Yougov had it Boris 74% Hunt 26% the previous week with Tory members) it looks like Swinson v Davey could be closer than Boris v Hunt
Mr. Meeks, different people hold different opinions. Are you really saying there's no legitimate reason at all to criticise the EU or the way it operates?
Mr Dancer, criticising an institution such as the EU and the way it operates is perfectly legitimate, but often simplistic. As I have sometimes said on here before, our own institutions are a deal more worthy of criticism and yet people are making very little noise about reforming them. It must be quite difficult to bear for our continental cousins to have us lecturing and posturing about "democracy" when we have FPTP and the House of Lords. As Our Lord is said to have stated "First take the beam of wood out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to take the splinter out of your brother's eye". Hypocrisy is written all over the Brexit philosophy.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
Err, the French at net contributors to CAP.
Not where the money is coming from but where it is going. The inheritance laws in France mean you have a lot of small sub-optimal farms that are inefficient. Consequently they wanted a structure with high fixed minimum prices and maximum volumes.
The U.K. farming system (specifically the arable - hill farming is different) is a very efficient agribusiness. They don’t need this help. It should be targeted away from agribusiness towards hill farming etc where there are environmental benefits from keeping land in productive use
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Boris knows how to read an audience, he still will have my vote this week
I'm not well up on psychopathy so I bow to your greater knowledge of yourself and the rest of his audience. All the rest of us can do is rub our eyes and watch on bewildered
M theory has been proven much like Newton "discovered" gravity - we have proposed a model which explains observed phenome.
I quite liked the phlogiston theory. At least that was disprovable, and so it proved.
Edit; Newton's gravity worked well but it wasn't a theory of everything. Relativity works well, and so does quantum theory - even if it raises more questions than answers/
It seems that’s been his stock story for years. The fact that he thinks “you can’t make fun of gay waiters anymore” is a key sign of tolerance says a lot about him.
As well as his key commitment to Leave the EU with No Deal and go to WTO terms Nigel Farage promises to abolish interest rates on student loans, scrap HS2 and halve overseas aid use the savings to fund £200 billion of economic development outside London at a rally in Birmingham today.
He also unveiled the first 100 Brexit Party Parliamentary candidates selected ready for any snap general election.
Be fair Ian - @HYUFD is a conservative candidate and still has political ambition. Don’t get him in trouble even in jest
Over 50% of 2017 Tory voters voted Brexit Party in May, I did not but the real trouble for Tories will be if they do not commit to deliver Brexit
No they didn't.
13.6m people voted Conservative in the 2017 General Election.
The Brexit Party got 5.2m votes in the 2019 Euros.
Even if EVERY Brexit voter was 2017 Tory (they weren't), they were still nowhere near 50% of 2017 Tory voters.
Of those who voted then but as YouGov has showed if the Tories do not deliver Brexit and extend again in October they will fall behind the Brexit Party at the next general election and probably go the way of the dodo until the remnants of the party are taken over by the Brexit Party or end up in the LDs. That is what happened to the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada once it fell behind the populist rightwing Reform Party in 1993 and lost power to the Liberal Party
Other than the fact the present day Conservative Party doesn’t have the word “progressive” in front of it, what’s the difference?
I concede it has its roots in Western Canada rather than Ontario, but that’s about it.
The present day Conservative Party of Canada was formed by a merger (effectively a takeover) between the Reform Party's successor party 'the Alliance' and the Progressive Conservatives in 1993
It seems that’s been his stock story for years. The fact that he thinks “you can’t make fun of gay waiters anymore” is a key sign of tolerance says a lot about him.
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
40% of LibDem members sitting on the fence.
Their natural home.
That's a shot that has the distinction of being both cheap AND completely untrue.
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
Err, the French at net contributors to CAP.
Not where the money is coming from but where it is going. The inheritance laws in France mean you have a lot of small sub-optimal farms that are inefficient. Consequently they wanted a structure with high fixed minimum prices and maximum volumes.
The U.K. farming system (specifically the arable - hill farming is different) is a very efficient agribusiness. They don’t need this help. It should be targeted away from agribusiness towards hill farming etc where there are environmental benefits from keeping land in productive use
Hill farming - where over grazing means that nothing grows. Far too many sheep on the fells.
As well as Hunt's pledge today to provide funds to support farmers, fishermen and small businesses in the event of No Deal, the Boris camp today has promised public sector workers a pay rise if Boris becomes PM
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
I agree. There is plenty of stuff that takes Boris apart out there, including from people who know him very well. This article just makes a few crude comparisons with Trump and then whips the sheet off its pre-prepared conclusion.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Boris knows how to read an audience, he still will have my vote this week
I'm not well up on psychopathy so I bow to your greater knowledge of yourself and the rest of his audience. All the rest of us can do is rub our eyes and watch on bewildered
I’ve watched several of the Johnson interviews and if you try to work out what he is saying it becomes obvious that he isn’t saying very much. If you let yourself get carried away with how he delivers rather than what he is actually saying it comes over well. The only interview that I warmed to him was when the little girl from a Somerset school asked him some questions. The best one and also his best answer was how to get rid of the seagulls from around the school. He looked towards his minders who clearly shrugged and for once had to think on his feet and he was actually quite charming and inventive.
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
40% of LibDem members sitting on the fence.
Their natural home.
That's a shot that has the distinction of being both cheap AND completely untrue.
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
Brexit is the exception. OK, Iraq was another exception. Generally they just wibble about, looking like Labour-Lite one minute and Tory-Lite the next.
And just when you think you know what they stand for, they do the complete opposite.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Boris knows how to read an audience, he still will have my vote this week
Translation: I have fallen completely for Boris's shtick
"the difference is that the hypothesis has to be falsifiable."
That used to be the case in theory. Science should try to prove the hypothesis is false, but sometimes grants and careers are built om maintaining the hypothesis.
That's why it doesn't always work that way. Outside my expertise, but didn't string theory become popular without being falsifiable?
'In theory' and 'in practice' are the same in theory (religion) but different in practice (science).
Mr. Roger, I'd be reassured if Boris were a psychopath.
He'd be more charming, more intelligent, and more competent.
There's an interesting theory that psychopathology arose to the evolutionary advantage of mankind, because psychopaths, being ruthless and talented, make great political, military, and business leaders (the downside being some of them can be somewhat murderous, though, contrary to popular opinion, this is far from universal).
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
You say he is a pathelogical liar.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
40% of LibDem members sitting on the fence.
Their natural home.
That's a shot that has the distinction of being both cheap AND completely untrue.
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
Brexit is the exception. OK, Iraq was another exception. Generally they just wibble about, looking like Labour-Lite one minute and Tory-Lite the next.
And just when you think you know what they stand for, they do the complete opposite.
The fact that you are retreating faster than Cunaxa or, as you so aptly describe yourself, 'wibbling about' speaks for itself.
You're talking utter rubbish. And I think you know it.
As well as his key commitment to Leave the EU with No Deal and go to WTO terms Nigel Farage promises to abolish interest rates on student loans, scrap HS2 and halve overseas aid use the savings to fund £200 billion of economic development outside London at a rally in Birmingham today.
He also unveiled the first 100 Brexit Party Parliamentary candidates selected ready for any snap general election.
Be fair Ian - @HYUFD is a conservative candidate and still has political ambition. Don’t get him in trouble even in jest
Over 50% of 2017 Tory voters voted Brexit Party in May, I did not but the real trouble for Tories will be if they do not commit to deliver Brexit
No they didn't.
13.6m people voted Conservative in the 2017 General Election.
The Brexit Party got 5.2m votes in the 2019 Euros.
Even if EVERY Brexit voter was 2017 Tory (they weren't), they were still nowhere near 50% of 2017 Tory voters.
Of those who voted then but as YouGov has showed if the Tories do not deliver Brexit and extend again in October they will fall behind the Brexit Party at the next general election and probably go the way of the dodo until the remnants of the party are taken over by the Brexit Party or end up in the LDs. That is what happened to the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada once it fell behind the populist rightwing Reform Party in 1993 and lost power to the Liberal Party
Other than the fact the present day Conservative Party doesn’t have the word “progressive” in front of it, what’s the difference?
I concede it has its roots in Western Canada rather than Ontario, but that’s about it.
The present day Conservative Party of Canada was formed by a merger (effectively a takeover) between the Reform Party's successor party 'the Alliance' and the Progressive Conservatives in 1993
That’s form over substance
Stephen Harper could easily have been a Progressive Conservative PM
"the difference is that the hypothesis has to be falsifiable."
That used to be the case in theory. Science should try to prove the hypothesis is false, but sometimes grants and careers are built om maintaining the hypothesis.
That's why it doesn't always work that way. Outside my expertise, but didn't string theory become popular without being falsifiable?
That is simply bad science, of which there is plenty.
String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested.
You can never prove any theory as a fact by testing. But you can disprove it by testing.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
Err, the French at net contributors to CAP.
Not where the money is coming from but where it is going. The inheritance laws in France mean you have a lot of small sub-optimal farms that are inefficient. Consequently they wanted a structure with high fixed minimum prices and maximum volumes.
The U.K. farming system (specifically the arable - hill farming is different) is a very efficient agribusiness. They don’t need this help. It should be targeted away from agribusiness towards hill farming etc where there are environmental benefits from keeping land in productive use
Hill farming - where over grazing means that nothing grows. Far too many sheep on the fells.
I believe Gove’s policies were focused on addressing this (flat farm payment) and encouraging work to avoid water run off, erosion and flooding
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
Why would it be necessary to read an article to know he's a liar?
Look at his employment record, look at his personal life, look at his brief tenure as Foreign Secretary.
This is a thoroughly disingenuous post. The Yougov poll was a "scenario" poll, and the Islington forecast was Flavible's electoral-calculus-style projection based on it.
Mike /may/ be right about recent polling, but one problem with his pov is that the EU elections and Westminster elections are very different kettles of fish. At the EU elections, there were various reasons why Lab voters might have voted LD on the day. But will those reasons hold for a GE? You have to doubt it, given the evidence of the last GE, where the direction of traffic was very much in the opposite direction. FPTP concentrates minds. People know how the system works: vote LD, get Tory (or Farage). So, in current polls, lower LD figures are more likely to be correct.
Hunt's Fuck Business line is utterly extraordinary. But he is, at least, being honest about the consequences of No Deal and that he is willing to close down countless businesses and put countless people out of work to achieve it. And that is the Tory problem. They have now sacrificed their USP - pragmatic competence - on the altar of extremity. If the Tories are willing to destroy British business to achieve Brexit, what is the point of them?
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Boris knows how to read an audience, he still will have my vote this week
I'm not well up on psychopathy so I bow to your greater knowledge of yourself and the rest of his audience. All the rest of us can do is rub our eyes and watch on bewildered
I’ve watched several of the Johnson interviews and if you try to work out what he is saying it becomes obvious that he isn’t saying very much. If you let yourself get carried away with how he delivers rather than what he is actually saying it comes over well. The only interview that I warmed to him was when the little girl from a Somerset school asked him some questions. The best one and also his best answer was how to get rid of the seagulls from around the school. He looked towards his minders who clearly shrugged and for once had to think on his feet and he was actually quite charming and inventive.
A hawk drone was quite inspired! He clearly meant a hawk but then realised it might upset the radical end of the animal rights movement 😊
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
You say he is a pathelogical liar.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
Have you seen ‘the man next door’ video where someone is in the next room providing him with prompts?
As well as Hunt's pledge today to provide funds to support farmers, fishermen and small businesses in the event of No Deal, the Boris camp today has promised public sector workers a pay rise if Boris becomes PM
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
Err, the French at net contributors to CAP.
Not where the money is coming from but where it is going. The inheritance laws in France mean you have a lot of small sub-optimal farms that are inefficient. Consequently they wanted a structure with high fixed minimum prices and maximum volumes.
The U.K. farming system (specifically the arable - hill farming is different) is a very efficient agribusiness. They don’t need this help. It should be targeted away from agribusiness towards hill farming etc where there are environmental benefits from keeping land in productive use
It would be better to support some hill farmers moving from sheep to forestry. Double the employment, carbon capture, water catchment management and biomass energy production - mixed forestry with native hardwood edges and blocks.
On the topic. Didn't we agree on PB during run-up to EU elections that they were hard ones for companies to poll?
I can't remember the technical reasons now, but doesn't that rather mean it doesn't really matter who turned out to be good at it, when the technical issues for GE will be different?
Dr. Foxy, if the evidence points to a theory being wrong, the theory gets amended or discarded (or should be). That's science. In religion, the conclusion (God exists, better worship him) persists regardless of evidence.
I agree that religion does not require concrete evidence. That is the basis of faith. Religious inspiration and experience is an inward phenomenon not an external one.
Refuting or proving religion by hypothesis testing is simply the wrong tool for the job, as futile as understanding the meaning of a painting by chemically analysing the pigment.
Chemically analysing the pigment can be important, because it can reveal how the pigment may have changed since the painting was created, and therefore prevent one from misinterpreting the painting on the basis of its present appearance.
Chemical analysis has a role in authenticity, restoration and historical research, but what it cannot do is explain the meaning of the work. That is a different domain of knowledge. Religion is like art in that way.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Boris knows how to read an audience, he still will have my vote this week
Translation: I have fallen completely for Boris's shtick
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
You say he is a pathelogical liar.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
Have you seen ‘the man next door’ video where someone is in the next room providing him with prompts?
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
Why would it be necessary to read an article to know he's a liar?
Look at his employment record, look at his personal life, look at his brief tenure as Foreign Secretary.
A good article would be a convenient way of doing the research in your second paragraph... 😛
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
That's surely the whole point of her article. She's not making a case but simple bullet points of why and how he's a dishonest and opportunistic shit. Most of us with a measurable IQ have worked this out for ourselves but she was aiming at Boris supporting Tory members and a US audience.
Mr. Observer, the spending promises are reckless, but not confiscating property and acquiring businesses without recompense reckless. And there's no corresponding anti-Semitism surge.
I agree with a lot of your sentiment but would add that your preferred alternative, (given a deal seems improbable, although do feel free to correct me), of remaining has very significant downsides as well.
Odd to think where we'd be had it been 52% the other way. Probably Cameron having handed over to Osborne, with Farage leading UKIP to causing Labour some serious harm?
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
You say he is a pathelogical liar.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
Have you seen ‘the man next door’ video where someone is in the next room providing him with prompts?
This is a thoroughly disingenuous post. The Yougov poll was a "scenario" poll, and the Islington forecast was Flavible's electoral-calculus-style projection based on it.
Mike /may/ be right about recent polling, but one problem with his pov is that the EU elections and Westminster elections are very different kettles of fish. At the EU elections, there were various reasons why Lab voters might have voted LD on the day. But will those reasons hold for a GE? You have to doubt it, given the evidence of the last GE, where the direction of traffic was very much in the opposite direction. FPTP concentrates minds. People know how the system works: vote LD, get Tory (or Farage). So, in current polls, lower LD figures are more likely to be correct.
Hmmm.. If I though there was actually a chance of a LD govt, I'd probably vote LD, but I like my MP. he is a good guy.
Mr. Observer, the spending promises are reckless, but not confiscating property and acquiring businesses without recompense reckless. And there's no corresponding anti-Semitism surge.
I agree with a lot of your sentiment but would add that your preferred alternative, (given a deal seems improbable, although do feel free to correct me), of remaining has very significant downsides as well.
Odd to think where we'd be had it been 52% the other way. Probably Cameron having handed over to Osborne, with Farage leading UKIP to causing Labour some serious harm?
No need to acquire businesses if they no longer exist. For Labour anti-Semitism, read Tory Islamophobia. There are no good options, but for me economic destruction is probably the least best. I guess others have other views.
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
You say he is a pathelogical liar.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
Have you seen ‘the man next door’ video where someone is in the next room providing him with prompts?
No, can you provide a link?
Google Comedian michael spicer man next door Boris that will bring it up, I must learn to cut and paste on an iPad
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. But please no excuses. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
You say he is a pathelogical liar.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
Have you seen ‘the man next door’ video where someone is in the next room providing him with prompts?
Just saw a clip of Cameron and Clegg in the rose garden on Sky news
How the country must wish we were back in those days. Their coalition government was a Rolls Royce compared to todays and the awful alternative of Corbyn
Mr. Observer, 'Islamophobia' remains a deeply flawed term as it wraps up entirely acceptable criticism of an idea with entirely unacceptable prejudice against individuals because of their religion.
The Conservative Party now is unimpressive, yet still far better than the far left leadership of Labour. When the Conservative leader has marched under Hitler banners, then he'll be the equivalent of Corbyn.
This is a thoroughly disingenuous post. The Yougov poll was a "scenario" poll, and the Islington forecast was Flavible's electoral-calculus-style projection based on it.
Mike /may/ be right about recent polling, but one problem with his pov is that the EU elections and Westminster elections are very different kettles of fish. At the EU elections, there were various reasons why Lab voters might have voted LD on the day. But will those reasons hold for a GE? You have to doubt it, given the evidence of the last GE, where the direction of traffic was very much in the opposite direction. FPTP concentrates minds. People know how the system works: vote LD, get Tory (or Farage). So, in current polls, lower LD figures are more likely to be correct.
You omit that the scenario of this poll is that an election takes place before Tories have Brexited, and with current Labour policy. It is hardly fanciful. Indeed no more than any poll.
This was a Westminster poll, with Westminster assumptions and turnout modelling. The stench of fear and denial from Labour is palpable.
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
40% of LibDem members sitting on the fence.
Their natural home.
That's a shot that has the distinction of being both cheap AND completely untrue.
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
Brexit is the exception. OK, Iraq was another exception. Generally they just wibble about, looking like Labour-Lite one minute and Tory-Lite the next.
And just when you think you know what they stand for, they do the complete opposite.
The fact that you are retreating faster than Cunaxa or, as you so aptly describe yourself, 'wibbling about' speaks for itself.
You're talking utter rubbish. And I think you know it.
"Neither [X] nor [Y], but something in between" Wasn't that the Catchphrase on Spitting Image?
The Telegraph article shows the lack of preparation on our side:
only “about 40pc” of British businesses that needed the [EORI or EU import/export registration] numbers had applied for one.
A second industry source with knowledge of the government’s "no deal" plans said that HMRC was planning to “wave through” trucks without an EORI “with a warning to get one for next time”, but conceded that shipping companies could still refuse the right to board [under commitments to the EU side].
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
Why would it be necessary to read an article to know he's a liar?
Look at his employment record, look at his personal life, look at his brief tenure as Foreign Secretary.
A good article would be a convenient way of doing the research in your second paragraph... 😛
'Research', Charles!! You have to do research to find that out?!
Jeez, you have to be walking around with your head up your arse not to notice.
I thought one of the few advantages of leaving the EU would be an end to the CAP. Now I see the government are to provide £6bn support for the farmers.
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
CAP is terrible. It is designed for French small holders not for the U.K. agribusiness sector. Michael Gove developed some interesting plans whereby farmers are paid for providing a public good (mainly environmentally based). That’s no different to any other spending decision by the state.
Err, the French at net contributors to CAP.
Not where the money is coming from but where it is going. The inheritance laws in France mean you have a lot of small sub-optimal farms that are inefficient. Consequently they wanted a structure with high fixed minimum prices and maximum volumes.
The U.K. farming system (specifically the arable - hill farming is different) is a very efficient agribusiness. They don’t need this help. It should be targeted away from agribusiness towards hill farming etc where there are environmental benefits from keeping land in productive use
Hill farming - where over grazing means that nothing grows. Far too many sheep on the fells.
I believe Gove’s policies were focused on addressing this (flat farm payment) and encouraging work to avoid water run off, erosion and flooding
I give Gove a lot of credit for what he's been doing. Free of EU regulation he should be able to do a lot more. I just hope that Bozo has the good sense to leave him in post.
(Yes I know, "Bozo" and "good sense" in the same sentence!)
If the 150,000 Tory Members only read one article before putting their X next to the name of the 'cavorting charlatan' it might as well be this one. Easy to read and after reading it no excuses please. If you want a pathological liar as PM vote for Boris. Most of us don't have a vote so it's in your hands
Disappointing article tbh
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
That's surely the whole point of her article. She's not making a case but simple bullet points of why and how he's a dishonest and opportunistic shit. Most of us with a measurable IQ have worked this out for ourselves but she was aiming at Boris supporting Tory members and a US audience.
Nah I suspect it was “crap, I’ve got an article to write and run out of time. Okay this’ll do - that’s $500 please”
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
40% of LibDem members sitting on the fence.
Their natural home.
That's a shot that has the distinction of being both cheap AND completely untrue.
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
Brexit is the exception. OK, Iraq was another exception. Generally they just wibble about, looking like Labour-Lite one minute and Tory-Lite the next.
And just when you think you know what they stand for, they do the complete opposite.
You're a supporter of the party whose "ethical foreign policy" turned into invading Iraq and rendition, whose opposition to top-up tuition fees turned into just that (breaking promises not once but twice), whose economic policy has transformed from Balls's austerity-lite to full blown McDonnellism in a few short years, that invented academy schools then opposed them, promised electoral reform and then didn't, opposed PFI then got addicted to it like some sort of drug, has had three years to make up its mind on Brexit but hasn't, is still sitting on the Trident fence despite its leader's supposed convictions, and took so long wondering whether to table a VONC in the current Tory government that the leader of every other opposition party tabled one first in an attempt to shame them into it?
Mr. Observer, 'Islamophobia' remains a deeply flawed term as it wraps up entirely acceptable criticism of an idea with entirely unacceptable prejudice against individuals because of their religion.
The Conservative Party now is unimpressive, yet still far better than the far left leadership of Labour. When the Conservative leader has marched under Hitler banners, then he'll be the equivalent of Corbyn.
I see no difference between hostility to Jews and hostility to Muslims. I see no difference in Boris Johnson pandering to racists and Jeremy Corbyn doing it. I see no difference between a Labour Magic Money Tree and a Tory one. There is one difference between a Labour and Tory Fuck Business, though. The Tory one is deliberate and knowing.
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
Partly prompted by @Pulpstar I have today backed Joe Biden at 7.2 and Bernie Sanders at 12.5 for the Democrat nomination. Sure, they underperformed in the debate but they still seem to be the two front runners in the polls and they both seem to have been oversold.
Is this another market I'm going to have to reverse ferret in?
Harris has had a good few days, but I still think Dems will end up going safety first with Biden.
But he needs to shake himself up a bit. He lacked energy in that debate. Age will become an issue if there is not more spark. The line “My time is up. I’m sorry” was an obvious gaffe.
Gaffe-prone Jo is the risky option. He too effing old and it shows
What's the precise age at which someone is too old to judge politics ?
Mr. Observer, the spending promises are reckless, but not confiscating property and acquiring businesses without recompense reckless. And there's no corresponding anti-Semitism surge.
I agree with a lot of your sentiment but would add that your preferred alternative, (given a deal seems improbable, although do feel free to correct me), of remaining has very significant downsides as well.
Odd to think where we'd be had it been 52% the other way. Probably Cameron having handed over to Osborne, with Farage leading UKIP to causing Labour some serious harm?
No need to acquire businesses if they no longer exist. For Labour anti-Semitism, read Tory Islamophobia. There are no good options, but for me economic destruction is probably the least best. I guess others have other views.
I think it is shameful the way that you try to equate Labour anti-Semitism with “Tory islamophobia”
Labour anti-Semitism is a real thing, with multiple data points, that goes right to the top of the party. In my view it’s unproven for Corbyn himself but there is lots of circumstantial evidence that he at least tolerates it in his allies
While I am sure there are cases of Tory islamophobia - and these should be cracked down on - there is limited evidence of anything more widespread (apart from wild accusations by Baroness Warsi which are partly driven by self promotion). There is certainly no evidence of the leadership sharing or tolerating these views
We all knew you were going to come up with some way to justify supporting Labour. To do it by diminishing a real and important problem is just shameful
Another poll (survey) for PB poll fanatics to get their teeth into:
Jo Swinson 40% Ed Davey 20% Undecided 40%
40% of LibDem members sitting on the fence.
Their natural home.
That's a shot that has the distinction of being both cheap AND completely untrue.
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
Brexit is the exception. OK, Iraq was another exception. Generally they just wibble about, looking like Labour-Lite one minute and Tory-Lite the next.
And just when you think you know what they stand for, they do the complete opposite.
You're a supporter of the party whose "ethical foreign policy" turned into invading Iraq and rendition, whose opposition to top-up tuition fees turned into just that (breaking promises not once but twice), whose economic policy has transformed from Balls's austerity-lite to full blown McDonnellism in a few short years, that invented academy schools then opposed them, promised electoral reform and then didn't, opposed PFI then got addicted to it like some sort of drug, has had three years to make up its mind on Brexit but hasn't, is still sitting on the Trident fence despite its leader's supposed convictions, and took so long wondering whether to table a VONC in the current Tory government that the leader of every other opposition party tabled one first in an attempt to shame them into it?
I'll put you down as a 'Maybe'.
I've stuck with my party through thick and thin. Of course they've done plenty I don't agree with, but they offer the best hope for the better society that I would like to see.
As well as Hunt's pledge today to provide funds to support farmers, fishermen and small businesses in the event of No Deal, the Boris camp today has promised public sector workers a pay rise if Boris becomes PM
As well as his key commitment to Leave the EU with No Deal and go to WTO terms Nigel Farage promises to abolish interest rates on student loans, scrap HS2 and halve overseas aid use the savings to fund £200 billion of economic development outside London at a rally in Birmingham today.
He also unveiled the first 100 Brexit Party Parliamentary candidates selected ready for any snap general election.
Be fair Ian - @HYUFD is a conservative candidate and still has political ambition. Don’t get him in trouble even in jest
Over 50% of 2017 Tory voters voted Brexit Party in May, I did not but the real trouble for Tories will be if they do not commit to deliver Brexit
No they didn't.
13.6m people voted Conservative in the 2017 General Election.
The Brexit Party got 5.2m votes in the 2019 Euros.
Even if EVERY Brexit voter was 2017 Tory (they weren't), they were still nowhere near 50% of 2017 Tory voters.
Of those who voted then but as YouGov has showed if the Tories do not deliver Brexit and extend again in October they will fall behind the Brexit Party at the next general election and probably go the way of the dodo until the remnants of the party are taken over by the Brexit Party or end up in the LDs. That is what happened to the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada once it fell behind the populist rightwing Reform Party in 1993 and lost power to the Liberal Party
Other than the fact the present day Conservative Party doesn’t have the word “progressive” in front of it, what’s the difference?
I concede it has its roots in Western Canada rather than Ontario, but that’s about it.
The present day Conservative Party of Canada was formed by a merger (effectively a takeover) between the Reform Party's successor party 'the Alliance' and the Progressive Conservatives in 1993
That’s form over substance
Stephen Harper could easily have been a Progressive Conservative PM
Stephen Harper was first elected as a Reform Party MP in 1993 having defected from the Progressive Conservatives
I expect the UK to de facto stay in the CAP, once we face reality, as we must at some point. British farmers like their subsidies and like their only major export market even more. They are a powerful lobby.
While it appears no-one in the government, with the exception of the outgoing Theresa May, cares less about Northern Ireland, CAP is pretty essential for NI's only significant industry. The Backstop is what it says. It's there to avoid the even worse outcome of a hard border. It's not a desirable end state.
For different reasons I also expect the UK de facto to remain in the CFP. Access to UK waters is a top ask for Denmark and Spain and high demand for France and possibly others. As future negations will be with the EU27 jointly and severally, the CFP is a too red an EU line for a UK in weak negotiating position to trade away, except with a fig leaf.
As well as Hunt's pledge today to provide funds to support farmers, fishermen and small businesses in the event of No Deal, the Boris camp today has promised public sector workers a pay rise if Boris becomes PM
Comments
Jo Swinson 40%
Ed Davey 20%
Undecided 40%
On the other hand it is very popular with mathematicians, as it has lead to many developments in pure mathematics, so it will continue to be an active area of research.
And it is not inconceivable that it might one day be testable.
String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested.
Took a century for gravitational waves.
This is not a tip (certainly on Gasly).
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1145592703733907456
"String theory is a theory, yet to be proven as a fact, but open to being tested."
It may be elegant mathematics, but bringing in half a dozen dimensions to make it work falls foul of Ockham's razor. And I don't think it is falsifiable. Scientists are just as prone to whimsy as non-scientists.
We know less about the world than we used to - we keep discovering new unknowns.
It’s an interesting premise but she didn’t build a case - she simply asserted it in the final sentence. It’s just a quick and easy “Boris is a liar” article that doesn’t add anything new
That said, I concede that the LibDems are in good shape!
Their natural home.
As Our Lord is said to have stated "First take the beam of wood out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to take the splinter out of your brother's eye". Hypocrisy is written all over the Brexit philosophy.
Took a century for gravitational waves.
Unfair on Einstein. We expected to find them. But lack of evidence isn't the same as evidence of lack - as scientists often say.
The U.K. farming system (specifically the arable - hill farming is different) is a very efficient agribusiness. They don’t need this help. It should be targeted away from agribusiness towards hill farming etc where there are environmental benefits from keeping land in productive use
M theory has been proven much like Newton "discovered" gravity - we have proposed a model which explains observed phenome.
I quite liked the phlogiston theory. At least that was disprovable, and so it proved.
Edit; Newton's gravity worked well but it wasn't a theory of everything. Relativity works well, and so does quantum theory - even if it raises more questions than answers/
https://twitter.com/howardmortman/status/1145362318978686976?s=21
If Biden wins the primaries it will be with moderate and conservative Democrats and Independents and the black vote, particularly in the South
The LibDems have been vociferous in opposing Brexit and campaigning to remain in the EU. You may not like it, but they certainly have NOT 'sat on the fence.'
That honour belongs to Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48819260
And just when you think you know what they stand for, they do the complete opposite.
"EU summit: Leaders resume talks after disagreement over top jobs"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48818715
He'd be more charming, more intelligent, and more competent.
There's an interesting theory that psychopathology arose to the evolutionary advantage of mankind, because psychopaths, being ruthless and talented, make great political, military, and business leaders (the downside being some of them can be somewhat murderous, though, contrary to popular opinion, this is far from universal).
Have you seen the cringeworthy 'model bus' interview? It is one thing for a politician to deflect using half truths, but to accidently allow an absolute whopper to trip off the tongue for no apparant gain is another. Having then realised the error, embellishing the point with spurrious detail, comfortable in the knowledge that your audience are so intellectually inferior that they won't even realise they have been subjected to a fib.
On topic. Labour overstated at 20 (odd) % means the above charlatan will be in charge for a very long time!
You're talking utter rubbish. And I think you know it.
Stephen Harper could easily have been a Progressive Conservative PM
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/06/30/british-trucks-face-turned-away-dover-french-no-deal-plans/
Look at his employment record, look at his personal life, look at his brief tenure as Foreign Secretary.
Mike /may/ be right about recent polling, but one problem with his pov is that the EU elections and Westminster elections are very different kettles of fish. At the EU elections, there were various reasons why Lab voters might have voted LD on the day. But will those reasons hold for a GE? You have to doubt it, given the evidence of the last GE, where the direction of traffic was very much in the opposite direction. FPTP concentrates minds. People know how the system works: vote LD, get Tory (or Farage). So, in current polls, lower LD figures are more likely to be correct.
I can't remember the technical reasons now, but doesn't that rather mean it doesn't really matter who turned out to be good at it, when the technical issues for GE will be different?
I agree with a lot of your sentiment but would add that your preferred alternative, (given a deal seems improbable, although do feel free to correct me), of remaining has very significant downsides as well.
Odd to think where we'd be had it been 52% the other way. Probably Cameron having handed over to Osborne, with Farage leading UKIP to causing Labour some serious harm?
https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1144507374721523712?s=09
How the country must wish we were back in those days. Their coalition government was a Rolls Royce compared to todays and the awful alternative of Corbyn
The Conservative Party now is unimpressive, yet still far better than the far left leadership of Labour. When the Conservative leader has marched under Hitler banners, then he'll be the equivalent of Corbyn.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/06/30/jeremy-corbyn-extreme-dull-poses-no-electoral-threat-tories/
Hmmm.
This was a Westminster poll, with Westminster assumptions and turnout modelling. The stench of fear and denial from Labour is palpable.
only “about 40pc” of British businesses that needed the [EORI or EU import/export registration] numbers had applied for one.
A second industry source with knowledge of the government’s "no deal" plans said that HMRC was planning to “wave through” trucks without an EORI “with a warning to get one for next time”, but conceded that shipping companies could still refuse the right to board [under commitments to the EU side].
Jeez, you have to be walking around with your head up your arse not to notice.
(Yes I know, "Bozo" and "good sense" in the same sentence!)
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/the-sinister-theory-about-boris-johnson-s-model-bus-story-john-mclellan-1-4956344
Labour anti-Semitism is a real thing, with multiple data points, that goes right to the top of the party. In my view it’s unproven for Corbyn himself but there is lots of circumstantial evidence that he at least tolerates it in his allies
While I am sure there are cases of Tory islamophobia - and these should be cracked down on - there is limited evidence of anything more widespread (apart from wild accusations by Baroness Warsi which are partly driven by self promotion). There is certainly no evidence of the leadership sharing or tolerating these views
We all knew you were going to come up with some way to justify supporting Labour. To do it by diminishing a real and important problem is just shameful
I've stuck with my party through thick and thin. Of course they've done plenty I don't agree with, but they offer the best hope for the better society that I would like to see.
While it appears no-one in the government, with the exception of the outgoing Theresa May, cares less about Northern Ireland, CAP is pretty essential for NI's only significant industry. The Backstop is what it says. It's there to avoid the even worse outcome of a hard border. It's not a desirable end state.
For different reasons I also expect the UK de facto to remain in the CFP. Access to UK waters is a top ask for Denmark and Spain and high demand for France and possibly others. As future negations will be with the EU27 jointly and severally, the CFP is a too red an EU line for a UK in weak negotiating position to trade away, except with a fig leaf.
And tax cuts focused predominantly on well off people who have already ceased to be active participants in the economy.