Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New named leader hypotheticals from YouGov suggest that the To

1246

Comments

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,567
    Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross abruptly canceled a long-planned meeting with Britain's Secretary of State for International Trade Liam Fox Tuesday because the British Ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch was also due to attend.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/commerce-secretary-wilbur-ross-cancels-meeting-with-uk-trade-minister-over-presence-of-british-ambassador
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,072

    That is Labour's problem. There is a complete absence of trust in them among many of their erstwhile voters on the defining subject of the age.

    It is a worry, I won't lie. I also fear the cheap populist appeal of Johnson. And I sense that Jez has become more liability than asset electorally.

    Nevertheless I think that Labour's Brexit position is (on paper) sound.

    If we get that pre-Brexit election (which I doubt) it is going to be quite a ride.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    And compromise Holyhead's port, economy and jobs in a part of Wales that has just lost the Nuclear power plant

    But no matter, Welsh ports and economy can go hang on some extreme brexit ideology

  • Options
    TabmanTabman Posts: 1,046
    kinabalu said:

    Tabman said:

    I'm sure I'm not the only person who trusted Labour to deliver a proportional voting system as promised in their 1997 manifesto.

    "Fool me twice; shame on me."

    If a manifesto commitment to Ref2 (with Remain as an option) is not sufficient for you, this implies that your vote is not going Labour's way regardless.
    Labour's manifesto "commitment" is not worth the paper it's written on. Corbyn (and Milne) want Brexit; simple as. Starmer, all the Labour remainers, and Labour voters, are being played for fools.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,567
    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    Which is fine as long as it’s not fresh food...
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    kjohnw said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump
    When will you realise that 160,000 members do not represent the majority view on brexit or more specifically no deal

    Boris is no Messiah
    He at least campaigned for and believes in the Brexit 52% voted for, unlike the present incumbent or Hunt
    You are becoming more ridiculous day by day.

    Both TM and Hunt voted for the WDA and if those you bow to now in the ERG had done the same we would be out
    TM deal was appallingly bad and trapped us in perpetual customs union with EU and aligned to EU rules. It was worst of all worlds and not the best deal that could have been achieved had she not allowed the EU to separate withdrawal and FTA to only follow later , agreeing to 39 billion for nothing in return guaranteed . If she was negotiating on location location I would end up paying double the value for a house
    The way things are moving it is becoming increasingly likely it will be the only deal (maybe with some cosmetic changes) that has any chance of brexit, anything else makes remain more likely
    I agree.
    Surely this impasse can not go on beyond the autumn.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    edited July 2019

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.

    It is upto the sane members and mps with opposition parties to curtail this madness no matter the consequences
  • Options
    surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Bang goes the Special relationship as long as Trump is President and any US UK FTA if Hunt wins then, not that that is very likely now anyway
    Why would we need to bow to Trump. Our ambassador was truthful so get over it.

    It is becoming increasingly likely that Brexit is going to fail unless Boris quickly moves to accept the WDA

    I do not trust Trump and have no desire to deal with his one sided trade deals
    Boris voted for the WDA at MV3 when most MPs did not, he just wants to remove the temporary Customs Union for GB May imposed
    Oh ! It is as simple as that. And, the EU will just wave it through. Sorry, I forgot, the EU carmakers will break down all the doors in Brussels !
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    Trump has an unerring ability to make people behave as crassly in response to him as they think he does.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,210
    edited July 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    When I was in Dublin in January, they were just finishing off a new ship designed to do just that, back and forth to Rotterdam.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,788
    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    QTWTIN

    Next! :D
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.


    It is upto the sane members and mps with opposition parties to curtail this madness no matter the consequences.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,137

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.


    It is upto the sane members and mps with opposition parties to curtail this madness no matter the consequences.
    :+1:

    I can barely comprehend what is happening to the Tories.
  • Options
    StreeterStreeter Posts: 684

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.

    It is upto the sane members and mps with opposition parties to curtail this madness no matter the consequences
    Sadly they are in the minority.
  • Options
    surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    Which is fine as long as it’s not fresh food...
    Yes, that is correct. Currently, it takes about 18 hours for the Food trucks to reach Europe through the land bridge. Direct shipment will mean 48-72 hours. For example, just Rosslare to Cherbourg will take 15 hours. Plus all the additional road miles.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,072

    Trump has an unerring ability to make people behave as crassly in response to him as they think he does.

    A true and important observation. He brings out the worst in everyone, supporter and foe alike.

    He poisons the well from which we all drink.
  • Options
    surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469

    Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross abruptly canceled a long-planned meeting with Britain's Secretary of State for International Trade Liam Fox Tuesday because the British Ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch was also due to attend.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/commerce-secretary-wilbur-ross-cancels-meeting-with-uk-trade-minister-over-presence-of-british-ambassador

    This is petty. What a government.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    Yes, I'm sure the lack of diplomatic missives telling politicians how stupid people are will be a severe blow.
  • Options
    surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,285
    So at the same time as losing our power of veto in Europe, we will be granting a power of veto to the US president ?

  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,072
    Tabman said:

    Labour's manifesto "commitment" is not worth the paper it's written on. Corbyn (and Milne) want Brexit; simple as. Starmer, all the Labour remainers, and Labour voters, are being played for fools.

    I think you're wrong.

    But, OK, if that is how you feel you will obviously not be voting Labour while Corbyn is leader.

    You are more anti Corbyn than anti Brexit.

    Important question - how many are like you?

    We will find out if we get that Oct election.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    I'm not sure quite how resonant the Epstein story is in the US (seems pretty smelly from here), but might Trump doubling down on Darroch be a handy distraction? It's a ploy that he's been accused of/credited with before.

    Barr has declared he is not going to recluse himself in the Epstein case.

    Quite sensational.

    I had been thinking this was more likely to destroy Clinton before Trump but now I am not so sure.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299

    The quiet man is turning up the volume. Looking forward to his first speech from the back benches.
    Really?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    Which is fine as long as it’s not fresh food...
    Yes, that is correct. Currently, it takes about 18 hours for the Food trucks to reach Europe through the land bridge. Direct shipment will mean 48-72 hours. For example, just Rosslare to Cherbourg will take 15 hours. Plus all the additional road miles.
    The night before last I took my youngest son, his partner and two of our grandchildren to Manchester Airport leaving here at 1.00am. The A55 eastbound was full of Irish HGV coming from the overnight ferry and heading to England. Additionally there were an extraordinary number of horse wagons, some very elaborate in the same convoy of vehicles.

    It does show the importance of the Holyhead land bridge
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,999
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I made exactly this point in one of my videos about Brexit.

    Rules of Origin mean that we could replicate our existing trade deals exactly, but lose (for example) the right to export cars to South Korea tariff free, because they would no longer meet Rules of Origin.

    This, of course, applies to both EU and UK producers. Simply, the proportion that was local content would decline because UK manufacturers would include EU content, and EU manufacturers would include UK. The impact is, due to the relative sizes of the markets, more severe for us.
    If you could overcome your mental block about us not being a “good fit” for the EU, would you have any arguments left in favour of Brexit?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,285
    edited July 2019
    Alistair said:

    I'm not sure quite how resonant the Epstein story is in the US (seems pretty smelly from here), but might Trump doubling down on Darroch be a handy distraction? It's a ploy that he's been accused of/credited with before.

    Barr has declared he is not going to recluse himself in the Epstein case.

    Quite sensational.

    I had been thinking this was more likely to destroy Clinton before Trump but now I am not so sure.
    And appears to believe his opinions superior to those of the Supreme Court:
    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/452043-barr-says-trump-admin-can-legally-add-citizenship-question-to-census

    Interesting to have an attorney general who is a self-professed scofflaw.

    And before @ydoethur weighs in, can I be the first to make a crack about the Epstein Barr virus ?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    kinabalu said:

    Tabman said:

    Labour's manifesto "commitment" is not worth the paper it's written on. Corbyn (and Milne) want Brexit; simple as. Starmer, all the Labour remainers, and Labour voters, are being played for fools.

    I think you're wrong.

    But, OK, if that is how you feel you will obviously not be voting Labour while Corbyn is leader.

    You are more anti Corbyn than anti Brexit.

    Important question - how many are like you?

    We will find out if we get that Oct election.
    The next few days post Panorama are going to be dreadful for labour and especially Corbyn. Three labour peers have resigned today before the programme.

    Is that a foretaste of what is to come ?
  • Options
    MangoMango Posts: 1,013
    Scott_P said:



    We have had enough of experts...

    We have had enough of exports.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,317
    Tabman said:

    kinabalu said:

    Tabman said:

    I'm sure I'm not the only person who trusted Labour to deliver a proportional voting system as promised in their 1997 manifesto.

    "Fool me twice; shame on me."

    If a manifesto commitment to Ref2 (with Remain as an option) is not sufficient for you, this implies that your vote is not going Labour's way regardless.
    Labour's manifesto "commitment" is not worth the paper it's written on. Corbyn (and Milne) want Brexit; simple as. Starmer, all the Labour remainers, and Labour voters, are being played for fools.
    You're mistaken. I know him and have discussed it with him in detail. Have you? You'd be on sounder ground if you said he didn't care that much, but he is mildly pro-Remain, partly because he thinks that socialism in one country is no longer a feasible project, and partly because he sees more allies on the Continent than in the past.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483

    That sounds like an absolute win. Can we palm him off on the dupes?
    If it means Stephen leaves the country permanently, I think we should take him at his word and accept his asylum application. In fact I daresay if someone organised a crowd funding whip-round we could pay for his one way fare within seconds at no cost to the taxpayer.

    As an added bonus, the notion of Boris making Nigel our Ambassador to Washington, as suggested on last night's Newsnight would remove another dangerous clown from our shores.
    Can they take Johnson as VP?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:
    I made exactly this point in one of my videos about Brexit.

    Rules of Origin mean that we could replicate our existing trade deals exactly, but lose (for example) the right to export cars to South Korea tariff free, because they would no longer meet Rules of Origin.

    This, of course, applies to both EU and UK producers. Simply, the proportion that was local content would decline because UK manufacturers would include EU content, and EU manufacturers would include UK. The impact is, due to the relative sizes of the markets, more severe for us.
    If you could overcome your mental block about us not being a “good fit” for the EU, would you have any arguments left in favour of Brexit?
    The people voted for it in a referendum. I did not , but I accept the result, the reason:

    Democracy
  • Options
    surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    AndyJS said:

    Those DLS specialists here: would it have made any difference to the Indian target for any given number of overs, if, for example, New Zealand had scored 211/6 ?

    Yes, the more wickets NZ lose, the lower the target for India would be. The model correctly IMO assumes that the more wickets you have in hand the more risks you would be able to take in the last few overs.
    http://icc-live.s3.amazonaws.com/cms/media/about_docs/518a6ddb1aaf6-Duckworth_Lewis Method.pdf

    Actually I found a good paper on this. There are good understandable examples at the back.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,184
    edited July 2019
    kinabalu said:

    That is Labour's problem. There is a complete absence of trust in them among many of their erstwhile voters on the defining subject of the age.

    It is a worry, I won't lie. I also fear the cheap populist appeal of Johnson. And I sense that Jez has become more liability than asset electorally.

    Nevertheless I think that Labour's Brexit position is (on paper) sound.

    If we get that pre-Brexit election (which I doubt) it is going to be quite a ride.
    Labour have said they will support leave and remain.

    Such a frankly bonkers position has turned you into a “no you fuck off you moron” poster.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,317

    Slightly off topic, this petition deserves more signatures to secure justice for innocent people who are wrongly accused of crimes, e.g. as a result of incompetence and have their reputation shredded even if they're innocent

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/247912/signatures/new

    I first saw a reference to it on Peter Hitchens' blog, which I read now and then.

    I'd sign if it was for all offences - seems entirely right. I don't see why people accused of sexual offences should be given special protection, though.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    AndyJS said:

    Those DLS specialists here: would it have made any difference to the Indian target for any given number of overs, if, for example, New Zealand had scored 211/6 ?

    Yes, the more wickets NZ lose, the lower the target for India would be. The model correctly IMO assumes that the more wickets you have in hand the more risks you would be able to take in the last few overs.
    http://icc-live.s3.amazonaws.com/cms/media/about_docs/518a6ddb1aaf6-Duckworth_Lewis Method.pdf

    Actually I found a good paper on this. There are good understandable examples at the back.
    Thank you.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,610
    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    No, he's heading for 70%.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,610

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.

    That's a feature, not a bug. As I find myself saying depressingly often, for some Leavers the problem was not being ruled by a foreign country, it was being ruled by the wrong foreign country.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
    Holyhead is a vital port in the Irish land bridge.

    See my earlier post about the numbers of HGV travelling east along the A55 in the early hours of the morning from the Irish ferry
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,810
    He knows he has no hope and so it matters not a jot, desperation.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    AndyJS said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    No, he's heading for 70%.
    Membership yes. But wider electorate, who knows how he will be received
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914
    Regarding President Trump and Sir Kim Darroch.

    A hypothetical. If private dispatches from the UK Ambassador to the EU claimed that:

    "Juncker is a drunk, and barely coherent after lunch"
    "The Commission is dysfunctional and faction ridden"
    "Selmayr is petty, small minded and hates the British"

    And then Juncker went onto Twitter and demanded that we fired our Ambassador, what would our response be?

    I suspect, and I could be wrong, that the very people who currently say we should bow to Trump's pressure, would be saying "f*ck you Juncker". (For the record, I suspect the opposite would also be true, with many of those who suggest resisting the pressure saying that the "EU is so important, we need to have someone they can trust doing the negotiation.")

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,187
    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
    You reckon they fill up in Britain?

    https://www.globalpetrolprices.com/diesel_prices/

    Ireland - $1.51 per litre
    UK - $1.65 per litre
    Germany - $1.41 per litre
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914

    Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross abruptly canceled a long-planned meeting with Britain's Secretary of State for International Trade Liam Fox Tuesday because the British Ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch was also due to attend.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/commerce-secretary-wilbur-ross-cancels-meeting-with-uk-trade-minister-over-presence-of-british-ambassador

    To be fair, I imagine what this actually means is that Fox refused to agree to Darroch not attending. Which is exactly as it should be.

  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    Tonights live ITV debate is bound to put Boris on the spot

    And that will be intersting. His first real test in full media view
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    malcolmg said:

    He knows he has no hope and so it matters not a jot, desperation.
    Maybe, but he is correct on this
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
    000s of Uk kids without asthma.

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,999
    https://news.sky.com/story/i-would-take-a-bullet-for-vladimir-putin-says-ex-f1-chief-bernie-ecclestone-11759373

    “I would take a bullet for Vladimir Putin, says ex-F1 chief Bernie Ecclestone

    The controversial ex-F1 boss says the Russian president should be "running Europe" and that he is not a supporter of democracy.”
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,935
    malcolmg said:

    He knows he has no hope and so it matters not a jot, desperation.
    A bit like his pledge to have a vote to restore foxhinting and Rajoy tribute act in pledging to ban indyref2 even with an SNP majority at Holyrood
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    Which is fine as long as it’s not fresh food...
    Sure: but meat and dair products go in refrigerated containers already.

    Fruit and vegtables subject to spoilage are a tiny, tiny proportion if Irish exports. See: https://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/export/irl/all/show/2017/
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    kinabalu said:

    Tabman said:

    Labour's manifesto "commitment" is not worth the paper it's written on. Corbyn (and Milne) want Brexit; simple as. Starmer, all the Labour remainers, and Labour voters, are being played for fools.

    I think you're wrong.

    But, OK, if that is how you feel you will obviously not be voting Labour while Corbyn is leader.

    You are more anti Corbyn than anti Brexit.

    Important question - how many are like you?

    We will find out if we get that Oct election.
    He's not wrong in believing Corbyn and Milne are pro Brexit. Where I think he's wrong is believing 'Starmer Labour Remainers and voters' are being taken for fools. I don't believe any of the above believe Corbyn to be anything other than a Leaver. His performance during the Referendum proved it beyond doubt. Any voter whose primary concern is Remaining would vote Lib Dem or Green or if in Scotland SNP
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,935

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Bang goes the Special relationship as long as Trump is President and any US UK FTA if Hunt wins then, not that that is very likely now anyway
    Why would we need to bow to Trump. Our ambassador was truthful so get over it.

    It is becoming increasingly likely that Brexit is going to fail unless Boris quickly moves to accept the WDA

    I do not trust Trump and have no desire to deal with his one sided trade deals
    Boris voted for the WDA at MV3 when most MPs did not, he just wants to remove the temporary Customs Union for GB May imposed
    Oh ! It is as simple as that. And, the EU will just wave it through. Sorry, I forgot, the EU carmakers will break down all the doors in Brussels !
    Barnier never required a temporary Customs Union for GB but May insisted on it
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,810

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    And compromise Holyhead's port, economy and jobs in a part of Wales that has just lost the Nuclear power plant

    But no matter, Welsh ports and economy can go hang on some extreme brexit ideology

    G, you should know by now , Wales and Scotland are expendable for Brexit
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    Under normal circumastances, the US government would have told us quietly. We'd have gotten rid of him quietly. And we'd all move on.

    The reason this hasn't happened is because we've been given an order. And because we've been given an order, we cannot comply.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,048
    AndyJS said:

    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

    Pseuds' Corner has a new entry.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,610
    TGOHF said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
    000s of Uk kids without asthma.

    There's a word for places that radically reduce pollution by reducing industry.

    "Poor"
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding President Trump and Sir Kim Darroch.

    A hypothetical. If private dispatches from the UK Ambassador to the EU claimed that:

    "Juncker is a drunk, and barely coherent after lunch"
    "The Commission is dysfunctional and faction ridden"
    "Selmayr is petty, small minded and hates the British"

    And then Juncker went onto Twitter and demanded that we fired our Ambassador, what would our response be?

    I suspect, and I could be wrong, that the very people who currently say we should bow to Trump's pressure, would be saying "f*ck you Juncker". (For the record, I suspect the opposite would also be true, with many of those who suggest resisting the pressure saying that the "EU is so important, we need to have someone they can trust doing the negotiation.")

    Speaking personally, I'd be embarrassed for us (as I am in this case). There are better ways of saying all that. My response to Juncker saying he wouldn't deal with our ambassador would be again, we couldn't possibly comply, but privately thinking we should probably get someone better equipped in the job when it becomes possible to do so.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,935

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.

    As opposed to diehard Remainers who are more loyal to Brussels than they are to the UK in their efforts to overturn the Leave vote 52% of voters voted for
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914

    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding President Trump and Sir Kim Darroch.

    A hypothetical. If private dispatches from the UK Ambassador to the EU claimed that:

    "Juncker is a drunk, and barely coherent after lunch"
    "The Commission is dysfunctional and faction ridden"
    "Selmayr is petty, small minded and hates the British"

    And then Juncker went onto Twitter and demanded that we fired our Ambassador, what would our response be?

    I suspect, and I could be wrong, that the very people who currently say we should bow to Trump's pressure, would be saying "f*ck you Juncker". (For the record, I suspect the opposite would also be true, with many of those who suggest resisting the pressure saying that the "EU is so important, we need to have someone they can trust doing the negotiation.")

    Speaking personally, I'd be embarrassed for us (as I am in this case). There are better ways of saying all that. My response to Juncker saying he wouldn't deal with our ambassador would be again, we couldn't possibly comply, but privately thinking we should probably get someone better equipped in the job when it becomes possible to do so.
    I'm 100% in agreement with you.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,610

    AndyJS said:

    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

    Pseuds' Corner has a new entry.
    I thought it was a parody, like that Titania Woke Twitter thing
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914
    viewcode said:

    AndyJS said:

    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

    Pseuds' Corner has a new entry.
    I thought it was a parody, like that Titania Woke Twitter thing
    It is a parody.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    rcs1000 said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    Under normal circumastances, the US government would have told us quietly. We'd have gotten rid of him quietly. And we'd all move on.

    The reason this hasn't happened is because we've been given an order. And because we've been given an order, we cannot comply.
    Why didn't Daroch have the decency to walk in the first place?

    It's obvious he can't do his job once the emails were public.

    The leaker should be found and prosecuted for treason, but the Ambassador still has to go.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    The US ambassador role has previously been offered to losing outgoing politicians by their successors, so we could get rid of him by offering the job to Teresa May. :lol:
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding President Trump and Sir Kim Darroch.

    A hypothetical. If private dispatches from the UK Ambassador to the EU claimed that:

    "Juncker is a drunk, and barely coherent after lunch"
    "The Commission is dysfunctional and faction ridden"
    "Selmayr is petty, small minded and hates the British"

    And then Juncker went onto Twitter and demanded that we fired our Ambassador, what would our response be?

    I suspect, and I could be wrong, that the very people who currently say we should bow to Trump's pressure, would be saying "f*ck you Juncker". (For the record, I suspect the opposite would also be true, with many of those who suggest resisting the pressure saying that the "EU is so important, we need to have someone they can trust doing the negotiation.")

    Speaking personally, I'd be embarrassed for us (as I am in this case). There are better ways of saying all that. My response to Juncker saying he wouldn't deal with our ambassador would be again, we couldn't possibly comply, but privately thinking we should probably get someone better equipped in the job when it becomes possible to do so.
    I'm 100% in agreement with you.
    Surely you can tell it like it is in much more diplomatic language than used in this case?

    If Sir Humphrey told it like it is, and it was leaked, the only real interest of last Sunday’s Mail would be swatting a fly that had sneaked in, or lifting the droppings from neighbours cat off the artificial grass.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
    000s of Uk kids without asthma.

    There's a word for places that radically reduce pollution by reducing industry.

    "Poor"
    Irish industry seems to be a net loss for the Uk - road maintenance , health impact, for a few sandwiches.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,610
    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    AndyJS said:

    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

    Pseuds' Corner has a new entry.
    I thought it was a parody, like that Titania Woke Twitter thing
    It is a parody.
    Difficult to tell, these days... :(
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,048
    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    AndyJS said:

    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

    Pseuds' Corner has a new entry.
    I thought it was a parody, like that Titania Woke Twitter thing
    It is a parody.
    I'm not sure it is a parody (as opposed to something that is so stupid it reads like a parody). Toby Young is listed as one of the editors of the site.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914

    rcs1000 said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    Under normal circumastances, the US government would have told us quietly. We'd have gotten rid of him quietly. And we'd all move on.

    The reason this hasn't happened is because we've been given an order. And because we've been given an order, we cannot comply.
    Why didn't Daroch have the decency to walk in the first place?

    It's obvious he can't do his job once the emails were public.

    The leaker should be found and prosecuted for treason, but the Ambassador still has to go.
    Well yes, and had President Trump not had his tantrum on Twitter, he would already have been reassigned. This stuff happens all the time; but it's done through backchannels.

    Darroch walking now looks like him being pushed. We can't have Juncker or Trump or Macron or Modi ordering us on Twitter as to who our Ambassadors are.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    He knows he has no hope and so it matters not a jot, desperation.
    A bit like his pledge to have a vote to restore foxhinting and Rajoy tribute act in pledging to ban indyref2 even with an SNP majority at Holyrood
    Take your blinkers off. It is the right response
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,946
    edited July 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    AndyJS said:

    Compulsory reading IMO:


    "In the following article, we will explore this quasi-religion, Wokeness, as a status system that functions predominantly to distinguish white elites from the white masses (whom we will call hoi polloi). It does this by offering a rich signalling vocabulary for traits and possessions such as education, intelligence, openness, leisure, wealth, and cosmopolitanism, all of which educated elites value (for a similar analysis, see Rehain Salam’s August essay in the Atlantic, discussed by David French in the National Review article linked above). From this perspective, the preachers of the Great Awokening—those who most ardently and eloquently articulate the principles of Wokeness—obtain status because they (a) signal the possession of desired traits and (b) promulgate a powerful narrative that legitimizes the status disparity between white elites and hoi polloi. The elites, according to these preachers, are morally righteous and therefore deserve status, whereas hoi polloi are morally backward and deserve obloquy and derision."

    https://quillette.com/2018/09/21/the-preachers-of-the-great-awokening/

    Pseuds' Corner has a new entry.
    I thought it was a parody, like that Titania Woke Twitter thing
    It is a parody.
    Is it a meta parody on the idea that righties can do witty parody? Reading that Toby Young is on the editorial board should be sufficient proof for that.

    Edit: beaten to it!
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,914
    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    Sure.

    But there won't be a US/UK trade deal because Conservative MPs from rural seats won't sign up to one, and Labour MPs aren't going to hand Boris Johnson a victory.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,929
    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    How well do you think these negotiations will proceed if we allow the other side to veto our negotiators?
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,610
    edited July 2019

    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    The US ambassador role has previously been offered to losing outgoing politicians by their successors, so we could get rid of him by offering the job to Teresa May. :lol:
    Theresa May = Prime Minister 2016-2019
    Teresa May = soft-porn actress with a similar name to the PM
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438

    rcs1000 said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    Under normal circumastances, the US government would have told us quietly. We'd have gotten rid of him quietly. And we'd all move on.

    The reason this hasn't happened is because we've been given an order. And because we've been given an order, we cannot comply.
    Why didn't Daroch have the decency to walk in the first place?

    It's obvious he can't do his job once the emails were public.

    The leaker should be found and prosecuted for treason, but the Ambassador still has to go.
    So which top business leader with diplomatic leanings is best to replace him? Or politicians with good business brain? Has to be someone who believes in Brexit and US FTA.

    I can’t think of anyone better placed than Liam Fox. It’s clear to him his only route on the greasy pole is downward.

    Hey! What a good betting tip I have just given you?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,240
    malcolmg said:

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    And compromise Holyhead's port, economy and jobs in a part of Wales that has just lost the Nuclear power plant

    But no matter, Welsh ports and economy can go hang on some extreme brexit ideology

    G, you should know by now , Wales and Scotland are expendable for Brexit
    Indeed to some sadly Malc
  • Options
    ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201
    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Ireland has a number of container ports, some of which are a reasonable size. None of them are - as far as I know - operating at capacity.

    Day rates for 1700 TEU container vessels are around $8,150 which is about average for the last five years.

    In the event of the "land bridge" being closed (which given our various treaty commitments outside the EU is incredibly small), then Irish exports to the rest of the EU would take 2-5 days longer than currently, and would probably cost marginally more. (On a per mile basis, container ships are more expensive than road but, of course, you still need roads at either end.)

    Closing the "land bridge" would be a very hostile act, and one that would have only modestly negative impacts on Irish exports to the rest of the EU.
    But it's not in our control, is it? We're told that in the event of no deal, there will be queues back to the M25. Will we be expected to allow Irish vehicles through so as not to inconvenience them?
    If there were queues back to the M25, then Ireland would simply use its container ports to export to Hamburg or Rotterdam. It would add 2-5 days to travel times, and would (in aggregate) be marginally negative to costs.

    When I was in Dublin in January, they were just finishing off a new ship designed to do just that, back and forth to Rotterdam.
    They are going to do it anyway, just announced the route is Rott -.Liverpool -> Waterford - Rott.

    It is viable because Irish exports go to Rotterdam for shipment around the rest of the world. Also they have stated that it will bring a portion of empty containers back to Ireland.
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438
    rcs1000 said:

    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    Sure.

    But there won't be a US/UK trade deal because Conservative MPs from rural seats won't sign up to one, and Labour MPs aren't going to hand Boris Johnson a victory.
    You might be right. But I may also be right Boris and the press won’t see it quite like that later this year.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scott_P said:

    Has BoZo blown it?

    Nope, most Tory members think Trump would be a good UK PM as a poll yesterday showed.

    Hunt may have blown it for the final time though by following the left liberal Remainer elite and Darroch's dismissal of Trump

    Fluent Telegraph, delivered in a Mail accent, lapsing occasionally into Express. The Conservative party is now more loyal to Donald Trump than it is to the UK, which it would happily see break apart. What an extraordinary debasement of a once great party we are watching.

    As opposed to diehard Remainers who are more loyal to Brussels than they are to the UK in their efforts to overturn the Leave vote 52% of voters voted for
    I wonder how many British voters support Trump in his spat with the British Ambassador as Johnson does. Less than 10 % ?
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    TGOHF said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    viewcode said:

    TGOHF said:

    Scott_P said:

    TGOHF said:

    Those potatoes aint going to float to Germany..

    Ummm, yes they are, actually...
    Great - so 150,000 fewer Irish lorries polluting the countryside ?

    When will this start from ?
    150,000 fewer lorries buying petrol in England
    150,000 fewer lorries buying ferry tickets at both ends
    150,000 fewer drivers buying sandwiches at petrol stations
    150,000 fewer lorries using ports at Liverpool, Milford Haven, Dover, Southampton, that one in Essex I always forget.

    But you know, bunnies that cough slightly less often. Yay.
    000s of Uk kids without asthma.

    There's a word for places that radically reduce pollution by reducing industry.

    "Poor"
    Irish industry seems to be a net loss for the Uk - road maintenance , health impact, for a few sandwiches.
    Quite. However, I do like this new warrior for the furnaces of industry against token environmentalist nonsense that we've unearthed in Viewcode. It's very 'fuel protestor circa 2000'. You think you know someone...
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    viewcode said:

    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    The US ambassador role has previously been offered to losing outgoing politicians by their successors, so we could get rid of him by offering the job to Teresa May. :lol:
    Theresa May = Prime Minister 2016-2019
    Teresa May = soft-porn actress with a similar name to the PM
    Be right back. Must do some more research.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,299
    viewcode said:

    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    The US ambassador role has previously been offered to losing outgoing politicians by their successors, so we could get rid of him by offering the job to Teresa May. :lol:
    Theresa May = Prime Minister 2016-2019
    Teresa May = soft-porn actress with a similar name to the PM
    Either could work...
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438
    dixiedean said:

    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    How well do you think these negotiations will proceed if we allow the other side to veto our negotiators?
    That’s a very good question, so simply put. The smartest answer is where you need a deal, any deal can’t walk away. And this would be the route to that deal you can then trumpet, to claim you are a success and Brexit a success.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,072
    Roger said:

    He's not wrong in believing Corbyn and Milne are pro Brexit. Where I think he's wrong is believing 'Starmer Labour Remainers and voters' are being taken for fools. I don't believe any of the above believe Corbyn to be anything other than a Leaver. His performance during the Referendum proved it beyond doubt. Any voter whose primary concern is Remaining would vote Lib Dem or Green or if in Scotland SNP

    Corbyn and Milne may be personally pro Brexit but in the event of Labour winning an election I don't see that overriding a manifesto commitment to Ref2 with Remain as an option.

    On Remainer voting, they should vote tactically for whichever of Lab, LD, SNP, Green, PC have the best chance of winning the seat they live in.

    That's if cancelling Brexit is truly their number 1 priority.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    Why do we want a trade deal with the US. The only reason they want one is to improve their trade balance with the U.K. why are we desperate to prostrate ourselves in front of someone who wants to fuck us over to replace our 700 agreements that we currently have. Maybe someone should look at who gains out of a deal with the US but it won’t be the NHS or our farmers.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,788

    Tabman said:

    kinabalu said:

    Tabman said:

    I'm sure I'm not the only person who trusted Labour to deliver a proportional voting system as promised in their 1997 manifesto.

    "Fool me twice; shame on me."

    If a manifesto commitment to Ref2 (with Remain as an option) is not sufficient for you, this implies that your vote is not going Labour's way regardless.
    Labour's manifesto "commitment" is not worth the paper it's written on. Corbyn (and Milne) want Brexit; simple as. Starmer, all the Labour remainers, and Labour voters, are being played for fools.
    You're mistaken. I know him and have discussed it with him in detail. Have you? You'd be on sounder ground if you said he didn't care that much, but he is mildly pro-Remain, partly because he thinks that socialism in one country is no longer a feasible project, and partly because he sees more allies on the Continent than in the past.
    You could have sat down with him for 12 hour marathon talks the fact if the matter is that the vast majority of Remainers will think like @Tabman and they won't trust Jezza to Remain...

    And at the same time you've just told your Labour Leavers to go to hell as well.

    Labour's done for Dr Palmer!
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,845
    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    He's not wrong in believing Corbyn and Milne are pro Brexit. Where I think he's wrong is believing 'Starmer Labour Remainers and voters' are being taken for fools. I don't believe any of the above believe Corbyn to be anything other than a Leaver. His performance during the Referendum proved it beyond doubt. Any voter whose primary concern is Remaining would vote Lib Dem or Green or if in Scotland SNP

    Corbyn and Milne may be personally pro Brexit but in the event of Labour winning an election I don't see that overriding a manifesto commitment to Ref2 with Remain as an option.

    On Remainer voting, they should vote tactically for whichever of Lab, LD, SNP, Green, PC have the best chance of winning the seat they live in.

    That's if cancelling Brexit is truly their number 1 priority.
    You are a doughty defender of Labour, but nobody is fooled. So long as Corbyn and his extreme left coterie are in position no one should vote Labour, Brexit or Remain.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,072
    TOPPING said:

    Labour have said they will support leave and remain.

    Such a frankly bonkers position has turned you into a “no you fuck off you moron” poster.

    No they haven’t. And no it hasn't.

    I have this sussed far better than most.

    You know that really.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,184
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    Labour have said they will support leave and remain.

    Such a frankly bonkers position has turned you into a “no you fuck off you moron” poster.

    No they haven’t. And no it hasn't.

    I have this sussed far better than most.

    You know that really.
    Evidently much better than all the news bulletins which describe the Labour position in exactly those terms.
  • Options
    nichomarnichomar Posts: 7,483
    kinabalu said:

    TOPPING said:

    Labour have said they will support leave and remain.

    Such a frankly bonkers position has turned you into a “no you fuck off you moron” poster.

    No they haven’t. And no it hasn't.

    I have this sussed far better than most.

    You know that really.
    I’m glad you have because I don’t know anyone else who has.
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438
    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    He's not wrong in believing Corbyn and Milne are pro Brexit. Where I think he's wrong is believing 'Starmer Labour Remainers and voters' are being taken for fools. I don't believe any of the above believe Corbyn to be anything other than a Leaver. His performance during the Referendum proved it beyond doubt. Any voter whose primary concern is Remaining would vote Lib Dem or Green or if in Scotland SNP

    Corbyn and Milne may be personally pro Brexit but in the event of Labour winning an election I don't see that overriding a manifesto commitment to Ref2 with Remain as an option.

    On Remainer voting, they should vote tactically for whichever of Lab, LD, SNP, Green, PC have the best chance of winning the seat they live in.

    That's if cancelling Brexit is truly their number 1 priority.
    But brexit isn’t a simple Remain or leave question, is it?

    Is it possible, Corbyn the old bennite has been leave for ever, till about two years ago, and now not sure a hard Brexit, out of everything, is really good news for the nations poorest in the Labour areas? That is impression I get.

    Or put another another way, is the current deal really our best deal? If we could get it, wouldn’t we like to remain on Cams negotiation rather than the current deal? Or Cams deal+? EU already has different lanes, we are not in the Euro currency lane for example, and a renegotiation could formalise such a direction of travel, and that would be stronger than remain on current terms.

  • Options
    TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,840
    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    That is Labour's problem. There is a complete absence of trust in them among many of their erstwhile voters on the defining subject of the age.

    It is a worry, I won't lie. I also fear the cheap populist appeal of Johnson. And I sense that Jez has become more liability than asset electorally.

    Nevertheless I think that Labour's Brexit position is (on paper) sound.

    If we get that pre-Brexit election (which I doubt) it is going to be quite a ride.
    Labour have said they will support leave and remain.

    Such a frankly bonkers position has turned you into a “no you fuck off you moron” poster.
    Labours Brexit position isn't designed for your benefit. It offers those who want a referendum what they want and a logical way to do it. If you are in a Labour Tory marginal and you want another referendum above anything else the choice is obvious.

    People who don't trust Labour regardless of what they say effectively don't matter as we can't appeal to them anyway.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,817



    Indeed to some sadly Malc

    You and others like you have another option, my friend. If enough people vote Lib Dem, we can be rid of Johnson, Farage, Corbyn AND Brexit in one night.

    Consign the ideologues to the dustbin of history and perhaps you can get your Party back.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    TOPPING said:

    kinabalu said:

    That is Labour's problem. There is a complete absence of trust in them among many of their erstwhile voters on the defining subject of the age.

    It is a worry, I won't lie. I also fear the cheap populist appeal of Johnson. And I sense that Jez has become more liability than asset electorally.

    Nevertheless I think that Labour's Brexit position is (on paper) sound.

    If we get that pre-Brexit election (which I doubt) it is going to be quite a ride.
    Labour have said they will support leave and remain.

    Such a frankly bonkers position has turned you into a “no you fuck off you moron” poster.
    Labours Brexit position isn't designed for your benefit. It offers those who want a referendum what they want and a logical way to do it. If you are in a Labour Tory marginal and you want another referendum above anything else the choice is obvious.

    People who don't trust Labour regardless of what they say effectively don't matter as we can't appeal to them anyway.
    Unless there are now too many of them. In which case, irrelevance beckons for Labour.
  • Options
    surbiton19surbiton19 Posts: 1,469
    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    He's not wrong in believing Corbyn and Milne are pro Brexit. Where I think he's wrong is believing 'Starmer Labour Remainers and voters' are being taken for fools. I don't believe any of the above believe Corbyn to be anything other than a Leaver. His performance during the Referendum proved it beyond doubt. Any voter whose primary concern is Remaining would vote Lib Dem or Green or if in Scotland SNP

    Corbyn and Milne may be personally pro Brexit but in the event of Labour winning an election I don't see that overriding a manifesto commitment to Ref2 with Remain as an option.

    On Remainer voting, they should vote tactically for whichever of Lab, LD, SNP, Green, PC have the best chance of winning the seat they live in.

    That's if cancelling Brexit is truly their number 1 priority.
    So you agree that in Don Valley, a Remainer should vote for LD or Green [ I presume LD ]
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Posts: 438
    nichomar said:

    Zephyr said:

    Rcs is quite right, we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to.

    Hunt's response is understandable as a last ditch attempt to differentiate himself and be on the 'right' side of the debate. Boris' response is coming from the fact that he will be in office soon and he's keeping his options open.

    “we cannot get rid of Daroch now we've been told to”. I’m not sure. In November we are out the EU without a deal with them, PM Boris will get massive support from his party and media supporters for a businessman in the role to work on that important trade deal. This weeks argy bargy will be history, By that point the national interest is the US/UK trade deal.
    Why do we want a trade deal with the US. The only reason they want one is to improve their trade balance with the U.K. why are we desperate to prostrate ourselves in front of someone who wants to fuck us over to replace our 700 agreements that we currently have. Maybe someone should look at who gains out of a deal with the US but it won’t be the NHS or our farmers.
    I don’t disagree with you. But imagine a scenario where Boris and trump sign something next year, and Boris then goes to country on the success of signing that. If the bad things in that deal you describe actually came true, it would be after Boris solid poll win wouldn’t it?
This discussion has been closed.