The biggest problem in perception of the WA (that it is the final deal, rather than a necessary first step towards a deal) would become its biggest strength - everyone would think we had left and that the WA was the "deal".
Yes exactly. The deed is done. Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night. We will have 'moved on' in this sense, and it is a real sense of that term. Many analogies spring to mind but for once in my life I will refrain.
No, second thoughts, I won't. The Brexit Bomb will have been diffused.
Brexit and its aftermath will be the single most important factor affecting British politics for years to come.
Far from the EU becoming a side story, as Brexiteers fondly hope, it will be the opposite. The legacy of Brexit and how it is being handled will have a much greater impact than people imagine. All this “moving on” nonsense is delusional.
If Rory believes the nation is crying out to talk about Brexit for 3 more years then its no wonder he lost.
Deal or no deal, the nation will in any event.
Disagree - the nation is itching to move on from Brexit.
And increasingly itching to give the Tories an absolute kicking... I'm finding on the doorsteps that even in the strongest Tory areas (in a Tory held seat) people are incandescent. I don't think even rushing for the door will solve the Tories Brexit problems. They are headed into meltdown territory in Scotland.
If Rory believes the nation is crying out to talk about Brexit for 3 more years then its no wonder he lost.
Deal or no deal, the nation will in any event.
Disagree - the nation is itching to move on from Brexit.
And increasingly itching to give the Tories an absolute kicking... I'm finding on the doorsteps that even in the strongest Tory areas (in a Tory held seat) people are incandescent. I don't think even rushing for the door will solve the Tories Brexit problems. They are headed into meltdown territory in Scotland.
Unsurprising - been in power for 9 years and foisted a crap PM on us for the last 3.
The Tories have gone full fruit-loop, batshit crazy, haven’t they? It’s quite extraordinary.
Yes. And yes. The Tory party is dying before our eyes. What rough beast is being born to replace it, who can say? At the moment it looks to have adopted Corbyn’s spending plans.
The Tory party is not dying. It is already dead. Johnson and Hunt are fighting over the corpse.
I don't disagree entirely - though the arguments about the future relationship would be intense.
I wonder how different in practice the objectives of Labour and Conservative would be as regards this? Perhaps not so much.
EDIT:
From PT - Corbyn - I am not the biggest fan of his (wouldn't mind him being replaced by someone a bit brighter, frankly) but essentially I am happy to vote Labour because I support most of the policies and I share the principles underlying the policies. I think it is time for a serious attempt to tackle inequality (of both opportunity and outcome) in Britain. It will only get worse if we don't. I recognize the risk (to the economy and to the peace of mind of many people, including myself) which comes with a majority Labour government who are ideologically committed to this, but to my mind it is worth it. It passes the risk reward test.
Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night.
They really will though.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
Brexit already features in just about every corporate bad news announcement. It is a catch-all excuse for everything that goes wrong, and will continue to be so. Car factory closing? Brexit. Steel company goes bankrupt? Brexit. Shortage of workers in catering/farming? Brexit. Pound falling, holidays more expensive? Brexit. Political paralysis? Brexit. Second referendum looms in Scotland? Brexit. No political progress in NI? Brexit. Foreign investment drying up? Brexit.
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
We're not going to move on from Brexit until the last i is dotted and t crossed on the FTA with the EU and that, my friend, is years and years away.
Nobody is listening to Ivan Rogers: if we aim to be like Switzerland (FTA, special partnership, all that stuff lying Dan Hannan waxes about), and actually achieve it, we will spend the rest of our days negotiating with the EU, all day, every day.
We will not move on from Brexit until we revoke or rejoin.
Probably a good headline for Hunt. He is showing creativity in his attempt to look tough on Brexit. Still feel though that he needs to go after Boris' character if he really wants to win.
The Tories have gone full fruit-loop, batshit crazy, haven’t they? It’s quite extraordinary.
Yes. And yes. The Tory party is dying before our eyes. What rough beast is being born to replace it, who can say? At the moment it looks to have adopted Corbyn’s spending plans.
The Tory party is not dying. It is already dead. Johnson and Hunt are fighting over the corpse.
Goodwin keeps arguing that there is a gap in UK politics for a socially conservative (tough on crime, tough on migrants, flag and family etc etc), but economically lefty (public spending on NHS, pensions, keeping British Steel etc etc).
Not sure whether the Boris tories are trying to get to that populist new point or have simply lost their minds.
Strikes me as odd that in order to win votes from the membership (generally southern-based, retired, well-off, small business, private sector backgrounds etc) they need to splash cash on public sector workers.
Poujadism flourished most vigorously in the last years of the Fourth Republic, and articulated the economic interests and grievances of shopkeepers and other proprietor-managers of small businesses facing economic and social change. The main themes of Poujadism concerned the defense of the common man against the elites.
May be this is a more apt comparison than with the BNP / Front Nationale, etc?
I don't remember enough of my studies of the Fifth Republic to know why it faded. Perhaps Charles de Gaulle was seen as enough of a strong/populist leader that the need for representation wasn't as strong?
IIRC that's right. Poujade seemed to think CDG was 'his type of President'
Poujadisme was rather more of a direct action movement (organised tax strikes, for example) - something which sees an echo in French fuel protests and perhaps the gilets jaunes - rather than a precise analogue for Faragism. But Charles is right that there are correspondences.
Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night.
They really will though.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
Brexit already features in just about every corporate bad news announcement. It is a catch-all excuse for everything that goes wrong, and will continue to be so. Car factory closing? Brexit. Steel company goes bankrupt? Brexit. Shortage of workers in catering/farming? Brexit. Pound falling, holidays more expensive? Brexit. Political paralysis? Brexit. Second referendum looms in Scotland? Brexit. No political progress in NI? Brexit. Foreign investment drying up? Brexit.
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
We will have to tune into the "Doom and Gloom at 10" every night to see whether it was Brexit or Climate Change to blame for the latest Cassandra warnings of the sky falling in.
Poujadism flourished most vigorously in the last years of the Fourth Republic, and articulated the economic interests and grievances of shopkeepers and other proprietor-managers of small businesses facing economic and social change. The main themes of Poujadism concerned the defense of the common man against the elites.
May be this is a more apt comparison than with the BNP / Front Nationale, etc?
I don't remember enough of my studies of the Fifth Republic to know why it faded. Perhaps Charles de Gaulle was seen as enough of a strong/populist leader that the need for representation wasn't as strong?
It had no answer to the Algeria War. Only De Gaulle offered a solution.
De Gaulle’s solution was to tell the pieds noir that he felt their pain and then promptly betray them once in office.
And thus.... The Day of the Jackal.
But he certainly had a solution to the impotence of parliament.
Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night.
They really will though.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
Brexit already features in just about every corporate bad news announcement. It is a catch-all excuse for everything that goes wrong, and will continue to be so. Car factory closing? Brexit. Steel company goes bankrupt? Brexit. Shortage of workers in catering/farming? Brexit. Pound falling, holidays more expensive? Brexit. Political paralysis? Brexit. Second referendum looms in Scotland? Brexit. No political progress in NI? Brexit. Foreign investment drying up? Brexit.
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
We will have to tune into the "Doom and Gloom at 10" every night to see whether it was Brexit or Climate Change to blame for the latest Cassandra warnings of the sky falling in.
No doubt voters will blame the government either way.
Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night.
They really will though.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
Brexit already features in just about every corporate bad news announcement. It is a catch-all excuse for everything that goes wrong, and will continue to be so. Car factory closing? Brexit. Steel company goes bankrupt? Brexit. Shortage of workers in catering/farming? Brexit. Pound falling, holidays more expensive? Brexit. Political paralysis? Brexit. Second referendum looms in Scotland? Brexit. No political progress in NI? Brexit. Foreign investment drying up? Brexit.
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
We will have to tune into the "Doom and Gloom at 10" every night to see whether it was Brexit or Climate Change to blame for the latest Cassandra warnings of the sky falling in.
No doubt voters will blame the government either way.
Yes but what about the presenters and commentators - they are what the News is all about these days.
Probably a good headline for Hunt. He is showing creativity in his attempt to look tough on Brexit. Still feel though that he needs to go after Boris' character if he really wants to win.
Hunt is doing with Boris what Boris is doing with Farage - seeking to out bonkers him.
Thing is I can't say it won't be successful. Those who won't vote for Boris won't vote for Boris; those who are wavering on the Boris side might be won over.
How good is all this for the country? No fucking good at all. What a tragedy.
Probably a good headline for Hunt. He is showing creativity in his attempt to look tough on Brexit. Still feel though that he needs to go after Boris' character if he really wants to win.
Hunt is doing with Boris what Boris is doing with Farage - seeking to out bonkers him.
Thing is I can't say it won't be successful. Those who won't vote for Boris won't vote for Boris; those who are wavering on the Boris side might be won over.
How good is all this for the country? No fucking good at all. What a tragedy.
Brexit repeats itself. First as farce, then as tragedy.
Probably a good headline for Hunt. He is showing creativity in his attempt to look tough on Brexit. Still feel though that he needs to go after Boris' character if he really wants to win.
Hunt is doing with Boris what Boris is doing with Farage - seeking to out bonkers him.
Thing is I can't say it won't be successful. Those who won't vote for Boris won't vote for Boris; those who are wavering on the Boris side might be won over.
How good is all this for the country? No fucking good at all. What a tragedy.
Either of them is going to go into a meeting with the EU's people, sit down and say 'Now about this Withdrawal Agreement' and whoever is leading on their side is going to say 'Same as the one we agreed to with Mrs May!'
Probably a good headline for Hunt. He is showing creativity in his attempt to look tough on Brexit. Still feel though that he needs to go after Boris' character if he really wants to win.
Hunt is doing with Boris what Boris is doing with Farage - seeking to out bonkers him.
Thing is I can't say it won't be successful. Those who won't vote for Boris won't vote for Boris; those who are wavering on the Boris side might be won over.
How good is all this for the country? No fucking good at all. What a tragedy.
Either of them is going to go into a meeting with the EU's people, sit down and say 'Now about this Withdrawal Agreement' and whoever is leading on their side is going to say 'Same as the one we agreed to with Mrs May!'
Well that's in the real world. We are talking about the Conservative party leadership election here.
Pence would probably do worse than a generic Republican, though (particularly in the pardoning Trump scenario).
He can always do the pardoning in the window between the election and the inauguration.
Though everyone would know it’s coming.
The only way I see it playing out is Trump actually dying, and with access to the best US healthcare, the odds are possibly a bit longer than actuarial tables suggest, despite his diet/obesity.
Brexit and its aftermath will be the single most important factor affecting British politics for years to come.
Far from the EU becoming a side story, as Brexiteers fondly hope, it will be the opposite. The legacy of Brexit and how it is being handled will have a much greater impact than people imagine. All this “moving on” nonsense is delusional.
Yes of course the negotiation of a new relationship with Europe will be massively important and will feature large and for a very long time in British political life. In life generally to some extent.
However the bitterly divisive EVENT will be history. And assuming the WA is ratified the chaos of No Deal will have been averted.
We will 'move on' from that is what I mean. Brexit will have been drained of much of its 'culture war' poison when the existential question - leave or not - is settled, provided that we leave in orderly fashion.
None of this is to say that the EFFECTS of Brexit will not be felt for generations. They will. But the 'war' will be over.
I would draw a comparison with a real war. WW2. It's undeniable that the ramifications of that are long lasting and enormous - they are still with us today - but this does not mean that the end of the event itself (peace) was not a genuine 'moving on' compared to what came before.
None of their fe***ng business. It is for the people of Scotland to decide, not a pair of southern jessies.
Did I miss the act of parliament that devolved the reserved Constitutional powers from the UK parliament at Westminster?
No he's written the history books and Culloden never happened.
We're waiting to see Jeremy Hunt's Brexit deal "that works for the people of Culloden".
No one lives at Culloden anymore. There is a large visitor centre to remind the Jocks that they lost.. and that the Jacobites were put to the sword. (paid for by the Scots)
Pence would probably do worse than a generic Republican, though (particularly in the pardoning Trump scenario).
He can always do the pardoning in the window between the election and the inauguration.
Is there any provision that necessarily restricts impeachments to individuals *currently* serving in office at the time?
As we're playing fantasy constitutional politics, is it - at least theoretically - possible that Congress could impeach Trump *after* he leaves office (and, hence , after a Pence pardon, which can't apply to impeachments), and which would then override the pardon and make Trump potentially subject to the normal process of the law?
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
Brexit and its aftermath will be the single most important factor affecting British politics for years to come.
Far from the EU becoming a side story, as Brexiteers fondly hope, it will be the opposite. The legacy of Brexit and how it is being handled will have a much greater impact than people imagine. All this “moving on” nonsense is delusional.
Yes of course the negotiation of a new relationship with Europe will be massively important and will feature large and for a very long time in British political life. In life generally to some extent.
However the bitterly divisive EVENT will be history. And assuming the WA is ratified the chaos of No Deal will have been averted.
We will 'move on' from that is what I mean. Brexit will have been drained of much of its 'culture war' poison when the existential question - leave or not - is settled, provided that we leave in orderly fashion.
None of this is to say that the EFFECTS of Brexit will not be felt for generations. They will. But the 'war' will be over.
I would draw a comparison with a real war. WW2. It's undeniable that the ramifications of that are long lasting and enormous - they are still with us today - but this does not mean that the end of the event itself (peace) was not a genuine 'moving on' compared to what came before.
I don't think the WW2 analogy is correct in this case - at the end of WW2 it was clear who had won and who had lost and the defeated were crushed - they had little choice but to accept their defeat - they could not continue the struggle. But the forces for and against Brexit are much more evenly matched - neither side is likely to crush the other in the near future, and unless that happens the struggle will continue.
And the chances of "leaving in an orderly fashion," already pretty minimal IMO, get smaller each time a leadership candidate opens his mouth.
None of their fe***ng business. It is for the people of Scotland to decide, not a pair of southern jessies.
Did I miss the act of parliament that devolved the reserved Constitutional powers from the UK parliament at Westminster?
No he's written the history books and Culloden never happened.
We're waiting to see Jeremy Hunt's Brexit deal "that works for the people of Culloden".
No one lives at Culloden anymore. There is a large visitor centre to remind the Jocks that they lost.. and that the Jacobites were put to the sword. (paid for by the Scots)
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
I don't think the WW2 analogy is correct in this case - at the end of WW2 it was clear who had won and who had lost and the defeated were crushed - they had little choice but to accept their defeat - they could not continue the struggle. But the forces for and against Brexit are much more evenly matched - neither side is likely to crush the other in the near future, and unless that happens the struggle will continue.
And the chances of "leaving in an orderly fashion," already pretty minimal IMO, get smaller each time a leadership candidate opens his mouth.
A more appropriate WW2 analogy might be Dunkirk.
Actually leaving the EU will be the forces of "remain" being rescued on the beach, ready to regroup for the eventual victory.
Winning this skirmish in the culture war is not the end, and we will not move on...
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night.
They really will though.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
Brexit already features in just about every corporate bad news announcement. It is a catch-all excuse for everything that goes wrong, and will continue to be so. Car factory closing? Brexit. Steel company goes bankrupt? Brexit. Shortage of workers in catering/farming? Brexit. Pound falling, holidays more expensive? Brexit. Political paralysis? Brexit. Second referendum looms in Scotland? Brexit. No political progress in NI? Brexit. Foreign investment drying up? Brexit.
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
We will have to tune into the "Doom and Gloom at 10" every night to see whether it was Brexit or Climate Change to blame for the latest Cassandra warnings of the sky falling in.
Rather appropriate use of 'Cassandra'. "a woman in Greek mythology cursed to utter prophecies that were true but that no one believed."
Long years of UK/EU talks lie ahead but they will not be leading the news night after night.
They really will though.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
Brexit already features in just about every corporate bad news announcement. It is a catch-all excuse for everything that goes wrong, and will continue to be so. Car factory closing? Brexit. Steel company goes bankrupt? Brexit. Shortage of workers in catering/farming? Brexit. Pound falling, holidays more expensive? Brexit. Political paralysis? Brexit. Second referendum looms in Scotland? Brexit. No political progress in NI? Brexit. Foreign investment drying up? Brexit.
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
We will have to tune into the "Doom and Gloom at 10" every night to see whether it was Brexit or Climate Change to blame for the latest Cassandra warnings of the sky falling in.
Rather appropriate use of 'Cassandra'. "a woman in Greek mythology cursed to utter prophecies that were true but that no one believed."
The big difference with the Lib Dem leadership contest is that neither of the contenders have had to have the courts placing restraining orders on them.
Isn’t that because the candidate who was arrested for assaulting their partner didn’t stand?
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
We're not going to move on from Brexit until the last i is dotted and t crossed on the FTA with the EU and that, my friend, is years and years away.
Nobody is listening to Ivan Rogers: if we aim to be like Switzerland (FTA, special partnership, all that stuff lying Dan Hannan waxes about), and actually achieve it, we will spend the rest of our days negotiating with the EU, all day, every day.
We will not move on from Brexit until we revoke or rejoin.
Yes. But for Switzerland, the EU is a chronic disease. They talk and they talk. And there are changes. But they are mostly imperceptible.
Switzerland has mastered gradualism. There are changes every year. (And not all in one direction, I would note.)
And because each change is so small, it doesn't utterly dominate politics to the exclusion of all other issues.
Pence would probably do worse than a generic Republican, though (particularly in the pardoning Trump scenario).
He can always do the pardoning in the window between the election and the inauguration.
Is there any provision that necessarily restricts impeachments to individuals *currently* serving in office at the time?
As we're playing fantasy constitutional politics, is it - at least theoretically - possible that Congress could impeach Trump *after* he leaves office (and, hence , after a Pence pardon, which can't apply to impeachments), and which would then override the pardon and make Trump potentially subject to the normal process of the law?
Congress could - but the only impeachment penalty available is disbarment from office, so no.
Bills of Attainder being something the Founders were not particularly fond of.
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
Strange. You can be almost dead but not almost pregnant. And if you can be almost unique can you also be almost not unique?
None of their fe***ng business. It is for the people of Scotland to decide, not a pair of southern jessies.
Did I miss the act of parliament that devolved the reserved Constitutional powers from the UK parliament at Westminster?
No he's written the history books and Culloden never happened.
We're waiting to see Jeremy Hunt's Brexit deal "that works for the people of Culloden".
No one lives at Culloden anymore. There is a large visitor centre to remind the Jocks that they lost.. and that the Jacobites were put to the sword. (paid for by the Scots)
Culloden is a good metaphor for the Brexit referendum - gullible fervent religious believers, agitated by a continental foe fought for these foreign interests before getting a damned good thrashing due to superior tactics and weaponry.
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
Strange. You can be almost dead but not almost pregnant. And if you can be almost unique can you also be almost not unique?
I was almost not unique - but my identical twin died.
Brexit and its aftermath will be the single most important factor affecting British politics for years to come.
Far from the EU becoming a side story, as Brexiteers fondly hope, it will be the opposite. The legacy of Brexit and how it is being handled will have a much greater impact than people imagine. All this “moving on” nonsense is delusional.
Yes of course the negotiation of a new relationship with Europe will be massively important and will feature large and for a very long time in British political life. In life generally to some extent.
However the bitterly divisive EVENT will be history. And assuming the WA is ratified the chaos of No Deal will have been averted.
We will 'move on' from that is what I mean. Brexit will have been drained of much of its 'culture war' poison when the existential question - leave or not - is settled, provided that we leave in orderly fashion.
None of this is to say that the EFFECTS of Brexit will not be felt for generations. They will. But the 'war' will be over.
I would draw a comparison with a real war. WW2. It's undeniable that the ramifications of that are long lasting and enormous - they are still with us today - but this does not mean that the end of the event itself (peace) was not a genuine 'moving on' compared to what came before.
If the WA is ratified Farage will go phoney berserk, betrayal will be screamed from the rooftops and 25% or so of people will buy it - plenty enough to continue the Tory psycho-drama.
Londoners poorer than most British regions, only NE significantly poorer. Shows the lie about the metropolitan elite. People in cities are more educated and younger, not elites.
The Tories have gone full fruit-loop, batshit crazy, haven’t they? It’s quite extraordinary.
Yes. And yes. The Tory party is dying before our eyes. What rough beast is being born to replace it, who can say? At the moment it looks to have adopted Corbyn’s spending plans.
The Tory party is not dying. It is already dead. Johnson and Hunt are fighting over the corpse.
Goodwin keeps arguing that there is a gap in UK politics for a socially conservative (tough on crime, tough on migrants, flag and family etc etc), but economically lefty (public spending on NHS, pensions, keeping British Steel etc etc).
Not sure whether the Boris tories are trying to get to that populist new point or have simply lost their minds.
Strikes me as odd that in order to win votes from the membership (generally southern-based, retired, well-off, small business, private sector backgrounds etc) they need to splash cash on public sector workers.
That's very much @isam's view too. And, I think it's plausible.
Unfortunately, along with much of the rest of metropolitan liberal elite, I don't find it a particularly attractive proposition.
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
Having outsourced Brexit policy to Nigel Farage, though, any backtracking on that will destroy him almost immediately.
The big difference with the Lib Dem leadership contest is that neither of the contenders have had to have the courts placing restraining orders on them.
Gross failing in living up to party tradition there, surely?
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Other than Brexit itself, nothing they say is of any relevance. They will firefighting an incoming sh*tstorm from day one, day and night.
To be honest, neither of them can command the house anyway the way they are both going.
The big difference with the Lib Dem leadership contest is that neither of the contenders have had to have the courts placing restraining orders on them.
Gross failing in living up to party tradition there, surely?
The actual Boris restraining order looks to be #fakenews created by the New Statesman's front page and the social media equivalent of chinese whispers.
Pence would probably do worse than a generic Republican, though (particularly in the pardoning Trump scenario).
He can always do the pardoning in the window between the election and the inauguration.
Is there any provision that necessarily restricts impeachments to individuals *currently* serving in office at the time?
As we're playing fantasy constitutional politics, is it - at least theoretically - possible that Congress could impeach Trump *after* he leaves office (and, hence , after a Pence pardon, which can't apply to impeachments), and which would then override the pardon and make Trump potentially subject to the normal process of the law?
Congress could - but the only impeachment penalty available is disbarment from office, so no.
Bills of Attainder being something the Founders were not particularly fond of.
Of course, federal pardons cut no ice with state prosecution of crimes under state law, and a) SCOTUS recently upheld the "dual sovereigns" doctrine that means double jeopardy does not apply, and b) NYS recently changed its law to make state prosecutions for the same facts as federal prosecutions much easier.
The big difference with the Lib Dem leadership contest is that neither of the contenders have had to have the courts placing restraining orders on them.
Gross failing in living up to party tradition there, surely?
The actual Boris restraining order looks to be #fakenews created by the New Statesman's front page and the social media equivalent of chinese whispers.
NYT: "Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., raised $24.8 million over the past three months, his campaign said on Monday, a head-turning total that is likely to be among the largest disclosed by any of the Democratic presidential candidates for the second quarter of the year."
The big difference with the Lib Dem leadership contest is that neither of the contenders have had to have the courts placing restraining orders on them.
Gross failing in living up to party tradition there, surely?
The actual Boris restraining order looks to be #fakenews created by the New Statesman's front page and the social media equivalent of chinese whispers.
Pence would probably do worse than a generic Republican, though (particularly in the pardoning Trump scenario).
He can always do the pardoning in the window between the election and the inauguration.
Is there any provision that necessarily restricts impeachments to individuals *currently* serving in office at the time?
As we're playing fantasy constitutional politics, is it - at least theoretically - possible that Congress could impeach Trump *after* he leaves office (and, hence , after a Pence pardon, which can't apply to impeachments), and which would then override the pardon and make Trump potentially subject to the normal process of the law?
Congress could - but the only impeachment penalty available is disbarment from office, so no.
Bills of Attainder being something the Founders were not particularly fond of.
Congress can also bar from the impeached person holding office in the future as well but it's the other part of Section 3, paragraph 7 which is the interesting one to me:
but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law
In other words, even if a President Pence were to pardon Trump (or, perhaps more realistically, if Trump were to issue blanket pardons to himself, his family and associates), it might be possible to override that with a subsequent impeachment, even if he had by then left office.
I don't think the WW2 analogy is correct in this case - at the end of WW2 it was clear who had won and who had lost and the defeated were crushed - they had little choice but to accept their defeat - they could not continue the struggle. But the forces for and against Brexit are much more evenly matched - neither side is likely to crush the other in the near future, and unless that happens the struggle will continue.
And the chances of "leaving in an orderly fashion," already pretty minimal IMO, get smaller each time a leadership candidate opens his mouth.
I can't say I'm too optimistic but my scenario is predicated on us leaving via a deal into a lengthy transition period in which to negotiate the new relationship.
In that case I think there is a good chance that a great deal of the political and cultural poison from the issue will be drained off. The 'Brexit Crisis' - the one that is right now paralysing our politics and threatening to tear the country apart - will be over.
My main point, however, is to make the distinction between the event of Brexit (leaving) and the ongoing process and ramifications of Brexit (the future relationship talks and the impact on the country over time).
Just because the latter will be important and ongoing for ever and a day does not mean that the former cannot be a meaningful end of the crisis. I think it can be and this, for me, is the USP of the Withdrawal Agreement.
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
Pence would probably do worse than a generic Republican, though (particularly in the pardoning Trump scenario).
He can always do the pardoning in the window between the election and the inauguration.
Is there any provision that necessarily restricts impeachments to individuals *currently* serving in office at the time?
As we're playing fantasy constitutional politics, is it - at least theoretically - possible that Congress could impeach Trump *after* he leaves office (and, hence , after a Pence pardon, which can't apply to impeachments), and which would then override the pardon and make Trump potentially subject to the normal process of the law?
Congress could - but the only impeachment penalty available is disbarment from office, so no.
Bills of Attainder being something the Founders were not particularly fond of.
Congress can also bar from the impeached person holding office in the future as well but it's the other part of Section 3, paragraph 7 which is the interesting one to me:
but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law
In other words, even if a President Pence were to pardon Trump (or, perhaps more realistically, if Trump were to issue blanket pardons to himself, his family and associates), it might be possible to override that with a subsequent impeachment, even if he had by then left office.
Would fall foul of the double jeopardy rule - and in any case that is not about Congressional powers, but merely a statement that impeachment does not affect criminal liability one way or the other.
Note any pardon does not affect criminal liability at the State level, and the SC recently ruled that trying different criminal charges relating to the same activities at the state level does not violate the rule. The decision was not one which liberals were particularly happy with, but it does leave Trump on the hook.
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
Strange. You can be almost dead but not almost pregnant. And if you can be almost unique can you also be almost not unique?
Why can't you be almost pregnant?
Surely the period during which the sperm is swimming towards the egg, but has not yet - errr - joined with it counts as "almost pregnant".
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
Name the last PM that didn't lie - Mrs Thatcher ?
Belgrano....
I thought she was vindicated after the release of the cabinet papers.
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
Strange. You can be almost dead but not almost pregnant. And if you can be almost unique can you also be almost not unique?
Why can't you be almost pregnant?
Surely the period during which the sperm is swimming towards the egg, but has not yet - errr - joined with it counts as "almost pregnant".
No, because of the uncertainty involved. That would be more like a Schroedinger pregnancy.
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
Strange. You can be almost dead but not almost pregnant. And if you can be almost unique can you also be almost not unique?
I'm not sure that's a useful concept other than in the dynamic sort of sense that Robert suggests (i.e. an example that came close to matching a unique occurrence but failed to do so).
The number of instances that form 'not unique' can be either anything upwards from 2, or zero (which is a different single-value definition of 'not existing'). Hence, 'nearly unique' can be a useful measure of a very small (but greater than one) sub-set of a large total.
By contrast, every unique item is potentially nearly not unique, either by increasing by any amount, or by decreasing by the only possible amount. 'Almost' implies a kind of relativism which is redundant here so in a static model, I don't think 'almost not unique' has any useful meaning.
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
Name the last PM that didn't lie - Mrs Thatcher ?
Belgrano....
Er no.
Westland, according to her official biographer. And that was to Parliament.
“Almost unique” is a phrase that makes my teeth grate.
You are unique. Or you are not.
There is no “almost”
I disagree.
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
Strange. You can be almost dead but not almost pregnant. And if you can be almost unique can you also be almost not unique?
Why can't you be almost pregnant?
Surely the period during which the sperm is swimming towards the egg, but has not yet - errr - joined with it counts as "almost pregnant".
No, because of the uncertainty involved. That would be more like a Schroedinger pregnancy.
It might be a valid description of the situation in retrospect - once the pregnancy was known - but not at the time.
Hunt hs surprised me twice over during his leadership campaign.
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
In effect the sane wing of the Conservative party (yes there are one or two of us) are hoping that, once in office, either of the candidates turns out to have been lying like a cheap NAAFI watch.
Ironically, on that basis, the form guide would be Boris.
The interesting thing will be to find out what Johnson has been lying about. He clearly is lying, but we can't be certain how until he becomes PM.
Name the last PM that didn't lie - Mrs Thatcher ?
I think up until Blair, lying was extremely rare among our Prime Ministers. (At least in public.)
Comments
Ratify the WA in 2020.
Sign a trade deal in 2025.
Something like that.
Far from the EU becoming a side story, as Brexiteers fondly hope, it will be the opposite. The legacy of Brexit and how it is being handled will have a much greater impact than people imagine. All this “moving on” nonsense is delusional.
Every job loss, every shortage, every avoidable death, every riot, will lead the news, for months
If the Tories think Johnson is going to wave a magic wand and make all this disappear they are even madder than we thought.
There was a vote and everything.
You got gubbed...
We will not move on from Brexit until we revoke or rejoin.
Not sure whether the Boris tories are trying to get to that populist new point or have simply lost their minds.
Strikes me as odd that in order to win votes from the membership (generally southern-based, retired, well-off, small business, private sector backgrounds etc) they need to splash cash on public sector workers.
I’m not sure how helpful they are, though.
But he certainly had a solution to the impotence of parliament.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/01/pete-buttigieg-campaign-second-quarter-1391479
Thing is I can't say it won't be successful. Those who won't vote for Boris won't vote for Boris; those who are wavering on the Boris side might be won over.
How good is all this for the country? No fucking good at all. What a tragedy.
Why on earth are West Indies 2.78 with Betfair Exchange when they would need the highest ever run chase at a World Cup match?
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/cricket/market/1.159361039
The only way I see it playing out is Trump actually dying, and with access to the best US healthcare, the odds are possibly a bit longer than actuarial tables suggest, despite his diet/obesity.
I like Romney at 1000/1.
However the bitterly divisive EVENT will be history. And assuming the WA is ratified the chaos of No Deal will have been averted.
We will 'move on' from that is what I mean. Brexit will have been drained of much of its 'culture war' poison when the existential question - leave or not - is settled, provided that we leave in orderly fashion.
None of this is to say that the EFFECTS of Brexit will not be felt for generations. They will. But the 'war' will be over.
I would draw a comparison with a real war. WW2. It's undeniable that the ramifications of that are long lasting and enormous - they are still with us today - but this does not mean that the end of the event itself (peace) was not a genuine 'moving on' compared to what came before.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/iowans-wont-vote-for-you-just-because-youre-their-neighbor/
As we're playing fantasy constitutional politics, is it - at least theoretically - possible that Congress could impeach Trump *after* he leaves office (and, hence , after a Pence pardon, which can't apply to impeachments), and which would then override the pardon and make Trump potentially subject to the normal process of the law?
Firstly, in the prelims, he came across as a much stronger candidate than I was expecting, and earned his place in the final two.
Secondly, once he made the final two, he has turned totally bonkers. As others have said, perhaps trying to out-Bozo Bozo might work. If he has decided that all other options would be useless, then shit-or-bust is the way to go. If he does win, I hope it is all an act, and sane Hunt occupies No. 10.
And the chances of "leaving in an orderly fashion," already pretty minimal IMO, get smaller each time a leadership candidate opens his mouth.
https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/1134914158288396288
Actually leaving the EU will be the forces of "remain" being rescued on the beach, ready to regroup for the eventual victory.
Winning this skirmish in the culture war is not the end, and we will not move on...
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/media/2019/07/mailonline-s-i-love-brexit-glastonbury-source-reporter-behind-story
I wonder how many of the cult who were so enthusiastically tweeting about this over the weekend will comment on this update.
"a woman in Greek mythology cursed to utter prophecies that were true but that no one believed."
Certainly, there is a binary distinction between 'unique' and 'not unique', but 'almost unique' has its place too.
In the absence of a useful word to mean "one of only '2|3|4 etc' examples", 'almost unique' helpfully implies 'extremely rare but not unique', especially when the example is out of a large set.
"one of the only..."
Switzerland has mastered gradualism. There are changes every year. (And not all in one direction, I would note.)
And because each change is so small, it doesn't utterly dominate politics to the exclusion of all other issues.
Bills of Attainder being something the Founders were not particularly fond of.
(Not really, in case you were worried.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48759591
Unfortunately, along with much of the rest of metropolitan liberal elite, I don't find it a particularly attractive proposition.
https://twitter.com/marcusfysh/status/1145680873817292801?s=21
Having outsourced Brexit policy to Nigel Farage, though, any backtracking on that will destroy him almost immediately.
To be honest, neither of them can command the house anyway the way they are both going.
https://twitter.com/janwells2912/status/1145702971373772800
but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law
In other words, even if a President Pence were to pardon Trump (or, perhaps more realistically, if Trump were to issue blanket pardons to himself, his family and associates), it might be possible to override that with a subsequent impeachment, even if he had by then left office.
In that case I think there is a good chance that a great deal of the political and cultural poison from the issue will be drained off. The 'Brexit Crisis' - the one that is right now paralysing our politics and threatening to tear the country apart - will be over.
My main point, however, is to make the distinction between the event of Brexit (leaving) and the ongoing process and ramifications of Brexit (the future relationship talks and the impact on the country over time).
Just because the latter will be important and ongoing for ever and a day does not mean that the former cannot be a meaningful end of the crisis. I think it can be and this, for me, is the USP of the Withdrawal Agreement.
Note any pardon does not affect criminal liability at the State level, and the SC recently ruled that trying different criminal charges relating to the same activities at the state level does not violate the rule. The decision was not one which liberals were particularly happy with, but it does leave Trump on the hook.
Surely the period during which the sperm is swimming towards the egg, but has not yet - errr - joined with it counts as "almost pregnant".
The number of instances that form 'not unique' can be either anything upwards from 2, or zero (which is a different single-value definition of 'not existing'). Hence, 'nearly unique' can be a useful measure of a very small (but greater than one) sub-set of a large total.
By contrast, every unique item is potentially nearly not unique, either by increasing by any amount, or by decreasing by the only possible amount. 'Almost' implies a kind of relativism which is redundant here so in a static model, I don't think 'almost not unique' has any useful meaning.
And that was to Parliament.