Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Biden drops to second place in California while his lead’s dow

1235»

Comments

  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143

    RobD said:

    I have just returned from Manchestsr Airport having picked up my son , his partner, and two of our grandchildren from their holiday flight

    However, I must recount this extraordinary tale.

    While waiting at Terminal 3 arrivals I observed several people using the car park pay machine. One of these was a lady with her husband/partner who was seeking assistance from the help phone. No one answered and a queue formed. The lady did not seem to know where to put in her parking token and I stepped forward to show her the slot to which she put in her token. Seconds later the fee came into view causing a gasp of horror from the lady and activating the camera phones from various people in the queue. The reason was the price displayed.

    £675,000 yes six hundred and seventy five thousand pounds

    She explained that she had booked their holiday with Thomas Cook who had arranged for a meet and greet service which did not turn up. She alleged Thomas Cook had told her to just leave her car in the car park. She disappeared for some time after the charge showed and returned with various pieces of paper, no doubt explaining the fee and the appeal process.

    The obvious lessons in this is not to leave your car in the absence of meet and greet representatives taking it from you, and parking machine can make extraordinary errors

    My word :o Did she manage to get her car out?
    I have no idea but she/they were very flustered
    What's the parking daily charge?
    I'm guessing its a short-term car park that charges per half hour or something like that, but still that's insane.
    If it was two weeks then it works out at £33.48 per minute, so there must be an eye-watering penalty charge for periods longer than an hour/day/week - or a strange miscalculation.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,325

    The Isle of Man is not in the EU, is it?

    Nope.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,997
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Did they say how?
    Magic
  • Options
    ReggieCideReggieCide Posts: 4,312
    nico67 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Did they say how?
    Oh come on you know . Just believe in it !
    we won't if you won't?
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,984
    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Did they say how?
    TechnologyMagic
    As Arthur C. Clarke stated the more advanced technology gets the closer it seems to be magic to most people.

    Brexit takes it to the next stage, we say that technology will perform the task even when IT professionals state it won't work...
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    edited July 2019
    nico67 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Did they say how?
    Oh come on you know . Just believe in it !
    "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."

    Who knew that a children's book would become a political creed.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,997
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You cannot polish a turd
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Boris: Trump's language unacceptable, but I wouldn't use that word ('racist')

    ‘Cos it’s too close to home ?

    Of course it was effing racist.
    Yes. It's as bad as people using the word "inappropriate" instead of the word "wrong". A particular bugbear of mine.

    Johnson is just..... yuck..... on every level.
    Every Prime Minister in living memory has come to the office with a certain amount of goodwill, is seen by many as a refreshing change to his/ her predecessor - benefits from that honeymoon period, even if it's been quite short for one or two recently. But now for the first time, we're going to have a PM who is utterly loathed by a majority of the population from day one. That fact in itself does not augur well.
    Not true. Macdonald was more widely loathed than Johnson. So much so that senior Tories seriously canvassed a coup to keep him out of power.

    That questioner on education needs to go easier on the drugs.
    English voters loathing Scottish PM. A pattern?
    Blair was born in Edinburgh, Cameron comes from a Scottish family, both won majorities in England
    Neither Scottish though
    Blair even passes the 'a majority of Scottish born voters voted Yes' Nat test, so not sure about that
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,937
    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Did they say how?
    Technology

    Double secret technology.

  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    And if they do deliver a No Deal Brexit Corbyn will be able to make hay with the scorched earth your stupid party will have gifted him.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Charles said:

    dixiedean said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Boris: Trump's language unacceptable, but I wouldn't use that word ('racist')

    ‘Cos it’s too close to home ?

    Of course it was effing racist.
    Yes. It's as bad as people using the word "inappropriate" instead of the word "wrong". A particular bugbear of mine.

    Johnson is just..... yuck..... on every level.
    Add to which: apologising "...for any offence caused".

    Just apologise ffs!

    (Not you @Cyclefree, obvs!)
    If I caused offence grates...if you didn't then why are you apologising?
    Because it bridges the gap between your belief that it was fair comment and the offence taken by some of the recipients
    It doesn't though, which is why it grates. There's no attempt to understand why the offence was caused, but an insistence that no fault was made, with a pretence at apology to make the complainant appear unreasonable. It's worse than saying nothing.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,319
    eek said:

    I have just returned from Manchestsr Airport having picked up my son , his partner, and two of our grandchildren from their holiday flight

    However, I must recount this extraordinary tale.

    While waiting at Terminal 3 arrivals I observed several people using the car park pay machine. One of these was a lady with her husband/partner who was seeking assistance from the help phone. No one answered and a queue formed. The lady did not seem to know where to put in her parking token and I stepped forward to show her the slot to which she put in her token. Seconds later the fee came into view causing a gasp of horror from the lady and activating the camera phones from various people in the queue. The reason was the price displayed.

    £675,000 yes six hundred and seventy five thousand pounds

    She explained that she had booked their holiday with Thomas Cook who had arranged for a meet and greet service which did not turn up. She alleged Thomas Cook had told her to just leave her car in the car park. She disappeared for some time after the charge showed and returned with various pieces of paper, no doubt explaining the fee and the appeal process.

    The obvious lessons in this is not to leave your car in the absence of meet and greet representatives taking it from you, and parking machine can make extraordinary errors

    Or you can just use the train or tram to Manchester Airport.
    True, but I overheard a conductor telling a woman who had not planned for extra time between the train arrival at the airport and flight departure being told the train services between a city centre and an airport had been suspended and so she was panicked as it was rush hour and a taxi would not get her to the airport on time.


    I tend to catch Trains to airports all the same!
    I need to fly from Manchester on Monday morning (as the flights from local airports are full). Given that I'm not driving at 3am and I'm not paying for it -it's the train on Sunday night and the a night at the Crowne Plaza...

    I took my family for their 5.55am flight from Manchester to the airport during the night getting there at 2.45am. My son told me the baggage drop did not open until 3.30. I understand the taxi fare from the Airport hotels in tbe early hours is around £8
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Oh dear looks like the OBR will be in serious trouble with the No Deal Death Cult tomorrow when it gives its forecast .
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    If the Tories do the former they will die and be replaced by the Brexit Party, No Deal would be a challenge but deliver on Brexit, no Brexit would kill the party
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,319

    I turned on the Sky coverage of the hustings to see Hunt taking questions from the audience, asked the member of the audience who'd just asked a question to wave so he could see who asked the question and he said "ah there you are sir...I mean, madam. Ah...you are a long way away".

    Probably a very easy mistake to make, but, still, got a laugh from me. I am easily amused though when it comes to these hustings events.

    How long did it take Hunt this time to mention that he used to be an entrepreneur you know?

    Sky reporting that when Hunt came on after Boris a lot of the audience started to leave.

    Read into that what you will
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226
    I think this is about Kamala Harris. If she demonstrates charisma and an ability to connect with voters emotionally she will be the nominee and will beat Trump.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    And if they do deliver a No Deal Brexit Corbyn will be able to make hay with the scorched earth your stupid party will have gifted him.
    He won't with most Remainers now voting LD it would be the yellows who would benefit most from No Deal if it went badly.

    Corbyn Labour would be squeezed by Leavers voting Tory and Remainers voting LD and would risk coming third never mind winning if we have a general election polarised on Brexit lines
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You have absolutely no understanding of Italian politics if you think that the reason Berlusconi won was because of his sense of humour.

    Do you really think - in your wildest dreams - that a sense of humour was what propelled Reagan and Clinton to the White House? Seriously?

    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Charles said:

    dixiedean said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Boris: Trump's language unacceptable, but I wouldn't use that word ('racist')

    ‘Cos it’s too close to home ?

    Of course it was effing racist.
    Yes. It's as bad as people using the word "inappropriate" instead of the word "wrong". A particular bugbear of mine.

    Johnson is just..... yuck..... on every level.
    Add to which: apologising "...for any offence caused".

    Just apologise ffs!

    (Not you @Cyclefree, obvs!)
    If I caused offence grates...if you didn't then why are you apologising?
    Because it bridges the gap between your belief that it was fair comment and the offence taken by some of the recipients
    It doesn't though, which is why it grates. There's no attempt to understand why the offence was caused, but an insistence that no fault was made, with a pretence at apology to make the complainant appear unreasonable. It's worse than saying nothing.
    I disagree. If what you said was meant in the right intentions but has caused unintentional offense then you might both not be sorry at saying what you said, but sorry that someone was offended. Quite literally. Unless you set out to cause offense when you said what you said.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You have absolutely no understanding of Italian politics if you think that the reason Berlusconi won was because of his sense of humour.

    Do you really think - in your wildest dreams - that a sense of humour was what propelled Reagan and Clinton to the White House? Seriously?

    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    Though it definitely aided Tony Blair. Teflon Tony was in part because he could deflect criticism with humour.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited July 2019
    kinabalu said:

    I think this is about Kamala Harris. If she demonstrates charisma and an ability to connect with voters emotionally she will be the nominee and will beat Trump.

    You don't develop it, you either have it or you don't, she does not, Harris is just an African American Hillary
  • Options
    The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were not defined by it. They could switch humour on and off without it looking odd. The problem for Boris is people laugh at him when he is trying to be deadly serious.

    Berlusconi and Italy are different case as Italy whilst a medium sized power has never been a big player unlike the US or UK. They are not really trying to project power in the same way. So maybe they take themselves less seriously as electing the 5 star movement has shown.

    Boris is fatally undermined by the perception of many that he is somehow funny. You obviously see beyond this or think it is going to improve his standing but if he does not do comedy, what exactly is his purpose?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,325
    HYUFD said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think this is about Kamala Harris. If she demonstrates charisma and an ability to connect with voters emotionally she will be the nominee and will beat Trump.

    You don't develop it, you either have it or you don't, she does not, Harris is just an African American Hillary
    HYUFD just as racist as his hero Trump!
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2019
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    If the Tories do the former they will die and be replaced by the Brexit Party, No Deal would be a challenge but deliver on Brexit, no Brexit would kill the party
    Your naivety is heroic. Not only do you fail to understand what a no-deal crash out would do to the economy and therefore the main - some would say only - electoral USP of the Conservative Party, you also have a touching faith in the fairy-tale that the Brexit Party is going to go away amidst the chaos.

    I hate to break it to you, but they're not going to go away. Quite the opposite: they'll be joining in with Labour, the LibDems, the SNP, the BBC, the CBI, the NFU, the unions, and anyone under 60, in blaming the Tories for the disasters which will dominate the media after crash-out. The only difference between the various factions blaming the Tories will be that one lot will blame them for crashing out in the first place, and the Brexit Party and fellow travellers will blame them for not crashing out with sufficient enthusiasm. But everyone, absolutely everyone, will blame them, and rightly so.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited July 2019
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You have absolutely no understanding of Italian politics if you think that the reason Berlusconi won was because of his sense of humour.

    Do you really think - in your wildest dreams - that a sense of humour was what propelled Reagan and Clinton to the White House? Seriously?

    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    It may sound simplistic but Berlusconi was by far the most charismatic figure in Italian politics for 2 decades from 1994, broke the old Christian Democrat and Socialist consensus and dominated the Italian political scene during that time.

    Reagan and Clinton were both the best candidates the GOP and Democrats have had in the last 50 years and the biggest presidential election winners on average, yes policy matters but so does communication skills, bring able to connect with voters and put them at their ease, part of the reason May's election campaign went so badly wrong in 2017
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    It's all a bit unfortunate. TBP and the ERG want to piss over everything that the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP, and most Labour voters believe in.

    And, the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and most Labour voters want to piss over everything I believe in.

    So, I have to choose between the two, I'll have to choose TBP/ERG, but I'd rather not have to make that choice.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You have absolutely no understanding of Italian politics if you think that the reason Berlusconi won was because of his sense of humour.

    Do you really think - in your wildest dreams - that a sense of humour was what propelled Reagan and Clinton to the White House? Seriously?

    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    It may sound simplistic but Berlusconi was by far the most charismatic figure in Italian politics for 2 decades from 1994, broke the old Christian Democrat and Socialist consensus and dominated the Italian political scene during that time.

    Reagan and Clinton were both the best candidates the GOP and Democrats have had in the last 50 years and the biggest presidential election winners on average, yes policy matters but so does communication skills, bring able to connect with voters and put them at their ease, part of the reason May's election campaign went so badly wrong in 2017
    As I said, you have no understanding at all of Italian politics. There are a number of good books on the topic I could recommend if you're really interested.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    edited July 2019
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    It's all a bit unfortunate. TBP and the ERG want to piss over everything that the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP, and most Labour voters believe in.

    And, the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and most Labour voters want to piss over everything I believe in.

    So, I have to choose between the two, I'll have to choose TBP/ERG, but I'd rather not have to make that choice.
    If you think the Lib Dems - still not a million miles away from the woolly sandal-wearers of cliche - want to “piss over everything I believe in” you must hold quite extreme views.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,850

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    It's all a bit unfortunate. TBP and the ERG want to piss over everything that the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP, and most Labour voters believe in.

    And, the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and most Labour voters want to piss over everything I believe in.

    So, I have to choose between the two, I'll have to choose TBP/ERG, but I'd rather not have to make that choice.
    If you think the Lib Dems - still not a million miles away from the woolly sandal-wearers of cliche - want to “piss over everything I believe in” you must hold quite extreme views.
    The Lib Dems are up the arse of the EU. They are the enemies of any form of British independence.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    edited July 2019
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    It may sound simplistic but Berlusconi was by far the most charismatic figure in Italian politics for 2 decades from 1994, broke the old Christian Democrat and Socialist consensus and dominated the Italian political scene during that time.

    Reagan and Clinton were both the best candidates the GOP and Democrats have had in the last 50 years and the biggest presidential election winners on average, yes policy matters but so does communication skills, bring able to connect with voters and put them at their ease, part of the reason May's election campaign went so badly wrong in 2017
    As I said, you have no understanding at all of Italian politics. There are a number of good books on the topic I could recommend if you're really interested.
    Cyclefree, there is a new film about Berlusconi called “Loro” by Italian maestro Paolo Sorrentino. I don’t think it’s still playing in cinemas but one to look out for.

    Sorrentino’s Il Divo - about Andreotti - is a masterwork.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    edited July 2019

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You have absolutely no understanding of Italian politics if you think that the reason Berlusconi won was because of his sense of humour.

    Do you really think - in your wildest dreams - that a sense of humour was what propelled Reagan and Clinton to the White House? Seriously?

    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    Though it definitely aided Tony Blair. Teflon Tony was in part because he could deflect criticism with humour.

    More importantly, he could deflect it with argument.

    Boris is nowhere near as funny as he thinks he is. His humour is used to disguise the fact that he is nowhere near as bright or thoughtful as he likes to make out. It is not the sort of humour which evidences a sharp mind. He is the class clown but wearing a suit (and doing even that badly). It is, frankly, a bit pathetic in a 55 year old. A little boy who has never really grown up. Being a sort of mascot for London as Mayor was about his level.

    We had May give us a masterclass in the Peter Principle. And now we will have the same from Boris.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    It's all a bit unfortunate. TBP and the ERG want to piss over everything that the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP, and most Labour voters believe in.

    And, the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and most Labour voters want to piss over everything I believe in.

    So, I have to choose between the two, I'll have to choose TBP/ERG, but I'd rather not have to make that choice.
    If you think the Lib Dems - still not a million miles away from the woolly sandal-wearers of cliche - want to “piss over everything I believe in” you must hold quite extreme views.
    The Lib Dems are up the arse of the EU. They are the enemies of any form of British independence.
    “Independence”.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    It may sound simplistic but Berlusconi was by far the most charismatic figure in Italian politics for 2 decades from 1994, broke the old Christian Democrat and Socialist consensus and dominated the Italian political scene during that time.

    Reagan and Clinton were both the best candidates the GOP and Democrats have had in the last 50 years and the biggest presidential election winners on average, yes policy matters but so does communication skills, bring able to connect with voters and put them at their ease, part of the reason May's election campaign went so badly wrong in 2017
    As I said, you have no understanding at all of Italian politics. There are a number of good books on the topic I could recommend if you're really interested.
    Cyclefree, there is a new film about Berlusconi called “Loro” by Italian maestro Paolo Sorrentino. I don’t think it’s still playing in cinemas but one to look out for.

    Sorrentino’s Il Divo - about Andreotti - is a masterwork.
    Thank you. I will look out for them.

    The films of Francesco Rosi (even though they are not recent) are superb and essential viewing if you want to understand Italy and Italian politics.
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Another spineless Tory.

    Enter George Freeman . Apparently Bozo won’t suspend Parliament but he needs that in the armoury to threaten the EU .

  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128
    edited July 2019



    “Independence”.

    Do you accept Australia, Canada and New Zealand are independent?

    If yes, why is this not possible for Britain, a far more important country?
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,214
    nico67 said:

    Another spineless Tory.

    Enter George Freeman . Apparently Bozo won’t suspend Parliament but he needs that in the armoury to threaten the EU .

    And why would they care......?

    Honestly, I have plants with more sense than most of the current Tory party.

    Goodnight.
  • Options
    nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    It's all a bit unfortunate. TBP and the ERG want to piss over everything that the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP, and most Labour voters believe in.

    And, the Lib Dems, Greens, SNP and most Labour voters want to piss over everything I believe in.

    So, I have to choose between the two, I'll have to choose TBP/ERG, but I'd rather not have to make that choice.
    If you think the Lib Dems - still not a million miles away from the woolly sandal-wearers of cliche - want to “piss over everything I believe in” you must hold quite extreme views.
    The Lib Dems are up the arse of the EU. They are the enemies of any form of British independence.
    The Tories are up the arse of Trump ! Leavers are happy to be bent over and banged by Trump but God forbid we work with other EU nations . Clearly the independence argument is a load of drivel. Leavers just want to suck up to the USA which apparently can do no wrong .
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    Viceroy said:



    “Independence”.

    Do you accept Australia, Canada and New Zealand are independent?

    If yes, why is this not possible for Britain, a far more important country?
    Hello Mr Spoof.

    I accept that all four are independent.
    Australia and NZ are even independent despite a trade treaty guaranteeing freedom of movement between them!
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,643
    kinabalu said:

    I think this is about Kamala Harris. If she demonstrates charisma and an ability to connect with voters emotionally she will be the nominee and will beat Trump.

    She has charisma - I think it rather about abandoning the caution that has brought her this far. A presidential candidate doesn’t have the luxury of triangulating while they establish themselves in the public mind. A Biden can run a cautious campaign (though he too is now seeing the downside of that), but a newcomer can’t.

    The Biden attack showed she’s prepared to gamble, but is doesn’t really do much to establish who she is for voters who up until now have no idea about her.

    But the idea that she is Hillary is just silly. She’s a far more natural politician.

  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128



    Hello Mr Spoof.

    I accept that all four are independent.
    Australia and NZ are even independent despite a trade treaty guaranteeing freedom of movement between them!

    And amazingly they don't make eachothers laws, subscribe to a federal court or have a President, Parliament and Commission. How on earth do they manage?
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    That made me smile!!
  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128
    https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1151602523909869568

    Project Fear 2.0 now reduced to....

    - No Deal "could" result in recession.
    - Britain "could" be 3% worse off in 2021.

    Could and 3%. Ha Ha Ha. Is this the best they can come up with? :smiley:
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    Viceroy said:



    Hello Mr Spoof.

    I accept that all four are independent.
    Australia and NZ are even independent despite a trade treaty guaranteeing freedom of movement between them!

    And amazingly they don't make eachothers laws, subscribe to a federal court or have a President, Parliament and Commission. How on earth do they manage?
    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    I have just returned from Manchestsr Airport having picked up my son , his partner, and two of our grandchildren from their holiday flight

    However, I must recount this extraordinary tale.

    While waiting at Terminal 3 arrivals I observed several people using the car park pay machine. One of these was a lady with her husband/partner who was seeking assistance from the help phone. No one answered and a queue formed. The lady did not seem to know where to put in her parking token and I stepped forward to show her the slot to which she put in her token. Seconds later the fee came into view causing a gasp of horror from the lady and activating the camera phones from various people in the queue. The reason was the price displayed.

    £675,000 yes six hundred and seventy five thousand pounds

    She explained that she had booked their holiday with Thomas Cook who had arranged for a meet and greet service which did not turn up. She alleged Thomas Cook had told her to just leave her car in the car park. She disappeared for some time after the charge showed and returned with various pieces of paper, no doubt explaining the fee and the appeal process.

    The obvious lessons in this is not to leave your car in the absence of meet and greet representatives taking it from you, and parking machine can make extraordinary errors

    I can't say I'm surprised. I would rate Manchester airport the worst in the world.
  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    Viceroy said:


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited July 2019
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think this is about Kamala Harris. If she demonstrates charisma and an ability to connect with voters emotionally she will be the nominee and will beat Trump.

    She has charisma - I think it rather about abandoning the caution that has brought her this far. A presidential candidate doesn’t have the luxury of triangulating while they establish themselves in the public mind. A Biden can run a cautious campaign (though he too is now seeing the downside of that), but a newcomer can’t.

    The Biden attack showed she’s prepared to gamble, but is doesn’t really do much to establish who she is for voters who up until now have no idea about her.

    But the idea that she is Hillary is just silly. She’s a far more natural politician.

    Her take down of Biden at the debate was a master stroke. It was obviously prepared well in advance, as evidenced by her campaign releasing a pic of her as a kid within seconds of her busing comments at the debate.

    She is good at prepared remarks but her problem is that she is not very good at off the cuff comments and unprepared responses.

    But after 1 of 12 debates, she has leapfrogged the field of candidates. Will that be he situation after the next coupe of debates? Who knows. It's ridiculously early to predict but right now she looks like the one to watch.

    She doesn't have the wooden style of Hillary, but at this point I'd not say she was a 'natural' politician, given her history.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    Viceroy said:


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.
    She’s wearing separate crowns, isn’t she?
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    If Kamala is nominated, she will lose.
    Clinton 2.0 (or is that 3.0).
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    RobD said:

    Viceroy said:


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.
    She’s wearing separate crowns, isn’t she?
    And there’s one “she”.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    RobD said:

    Viceroy said:


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.
    She’s wearing separate crowns, isn’t she?
    And there’s one “she”.
    She has distinct legal personalities. ;)
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Viceroy said:


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.
    She’s wearing separate crowns, isn’t she?
    And there’s one “she”.
    She has distinct legal personalities. ;)
    Are you calling Her Maj a schizophrenic?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Viceroy said:


    They are all members of various global bodies, some of which have Assembies, some of which have Presidents, etc.

    In fact, they even have a foreigner as head of state!

    But only a madman would say they are not “independent”.

    Intergovernmental bodies, not supranational bodies.
    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.
    She’s wearing separate crowns, isn’t she?
    And there’s one “she”.
    She has distinct legal personalities. ;)
    Are you calling Her Maj a schizophrenic?
    Legally speaking, of course :D
  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128
    edited July 2019

    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.

    No it isn't. The Commonwealth Realms are free to change laws like succession at will, and when they do make any changes, they make with agreement. There's no QMV or ECJ.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    edited July 2019
    Viceroy said:

    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.

    No it isn't. The Commonwealth Realms are free to change laws like succession at will, and when they do make any changes, they make with agreement.
    Yep. NZ could declare itself a republic, for example.

    It could withdraw, should it wish, from the agreements from Aistralia which guarantee tariff free trade in goods and freedom of movement.

    The U.K. could also declare itself no longer in the EU, via exercising A50 etc.

    Independence.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Cyclefree said:

    Next week we will lose this man - making a serious point about the spread of ebola in Africa -

    Arguing in the House of Commons today that we must be serious as a nation - and in particular at the moment - serious about the Ebola response. pic.twitter.com/yYjgGRUpw9

    — Rory Stewart (@RoryStewartUK) July 17, 2019
    and get a man who waves a kipper around during a speech instead.

    It makes me want to weep with rage.

    FWIW one of the major black marks against Hailsham was he had used a bell (“tolling for socialism”) as a prop in a speech. Demonstrated fundamental “unseriousness”
  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128

    Viceroy said:

    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.

    No it isn't. The Commonwealth Realms are free to change laws like succession at will, and when they do make any changes, they make with agreement.
    Yep. NZ could declare itself a republic, for example.

    It could withdraw, should it wish, from the agreements from Aistralia which guarantee tariff free trade in goods and freedom of movement.

    The U.K. could also declare itself no longer in the EU, via exercising A50 etc.

    Independence.
    We're talking about out decisions are made, not whether it is possible to leave these states/organisations. It's possible for Scotland and Northern Ireland to hold referendums on leaving the United Kingdom, yet you would not say they are independent just because they can hypothetically leave.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,857
    Viceroy said:

    Viceroy said:

    The monarchy is a “supranational body”.

    No it isn't. The Commonwealth Realms are free to change laws like succession at will, and when they do make any changes, they make with agreement.
    Yep. NZ could declare itself a republic, for example.

    It could withdraw, should it wish, from the agreements from Aistralia which guarantee tariff free trade in goods and freedom of movement.

    The U.K. could also declare itself no longer in the EU, via exercising A50 etc.

    Independence.
    We're talking about out decisions are made, not whether it is possible to leave these states/organisations. It's possible for Scotland and Northern Ireland to hold referendums on leaving the United Kingdom, yet you would not say they are independent just because they can hypothetically leave.
    I would not, because they can’t.

    Legally, neither can leave without the consent of the U.K.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    You have absolutely no understanding of Italian politics if you think that the reason Berlusconi won was because of his sense of humour.

    Do you really think - in your wildest dreams - that a sense of humour was what propelled Reagan and Clinton to the White House? Seriously?

    This sort of analysis - and that's being kind - is painful. Really painful.

    It may sound simplistic but Berlusconi was by far the most charismatic figure in Italian politics for 2 decades from 1994, broke the old Christian Democrat and Socialist consensus and dominated the Italian political scene during that time.

    Reagan and Clinton were both the best candidates the GOP and Democrats have had in the last 50 years and the biggest presidential election winners on average, yes policy matters but so does communication skills, bring able to connect with voters and put them at their ease, part of the reason May's election campaign went so badly wrong in 2017
    As I said, you have no understanding at all of Italian politics. There are a number of good books on the topic I could recommend if you're really interested.
    No, I just have no understanding of your biased anti Berlusconi version of Italian politics
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Just coming back from the London Hustings at the Excel centre.

    Boris gave his usual tour de force full of bravado and optimism about infrastructure and technology as well as post Brexit Britain plus his usual quips and jokes (including a brilliant one featuring a kipper complete with prop). As usual Boris committed to deliver Brexit on October 31st and beat Corbyn, however he ruled out a pact with the Brexit Party despite Farage being a former drinking companion. Both he and Hunt wanted to remove the backstop but both also promised to prevent a hard border in Ireland.

    Hunt also had some good ideas about social care and young people and was smooth as usual.

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn and Boris Leader and Hunt Deputy would be an ideal combination

    How many times did the audience laugh? You do realise that in contrast to IDS who had the amount of times the audience gave standing ovations as leader, Boris will be judged by how many times he can make the audience laugh? People are actually voting for the idiot because "he makes them laugh", not his stoicism in getting a deal or optimism to the point of stupidity.
    Boris has charisma, don't underestimate that and having a sense of humour can win elections, ask Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton or Berlusconi.

    Lack of charisma and a sense of humour can be fatal, see May and Brown
    Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton were not defined by it. They could switch humour on and off without it looking odd. The problem for Boris is people laugh at him when he is trying to be deadly serious.

    Berlusconi and Italy are different case as Italy whilst a medium sized power has never been a big player unlike the US or UK. They are not really trying to project power in the same way. So maybe they take themselves less seriously as electing the 5 star movement has shown.

    Boris is fatally undermined by the perception of many that he is somehow funny. You obviously see beyond this or think it is going to improve his standing but if he does not do comedy, what exactly is his purpose?
    Rome was never a big player?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    [snip]

    One thing I certainly felt was both would be miles better than Corbyn ...

    There was a time - not very long ago, actually - when the Conservative Party had higher aspirations than being better than a has-been, anti-Semitic, economically illiterate, terrorist-sympathising, manifestly incompetent far-left extremist.
    Well if they don't deliver Brexit that or PM Farage may be the result
    Indeed so (at least the Corbyn bit, I don't see the Farage bit). That will also be the outcome if they do deliver Brexit in the worst conceivable way, crashing us out in chaos. The main differences between the two disasters are that the former would be better for the country, and the latter would take many more years for the Conservative Party to recover from.
    If the Tories do the former they will die and be replaced by the Brexit Party, No Deal would be a challenge but deliver on Brexit, no Brexit would kill the party
    Your naivety is heroic. Not only do you fail to understand what a no-deal crash out would do to the economy and therefore the main - some would say only - electoral USP of the Conservative Party, you also have a touching faith in the fairy-tale that the Brexit Party is going to go away amidst the chaos.

    I hate to break it to you, but they're not going to go away. Quite the opposite: they'll be joining in with Labour, the LibDems, the SNP, the BBC, the CBI, the NFU, the unions, and anyone under 60, in blaming the Tories for the disasters which will dominate the media after crash-out. The only difference between the various factions blaming the Tories will be that one lot will blame them for crashing out in the first place, and the Brexit Party and fellow travellers will blame them for not crashing out with sufficient enthusiasm. But everyone, absolutely everyone, will blame them, and rightly so.
    A 3% decline for one year at most with No Deal with the Brexit Party falling to UKIP 2015 levels, no Brexit at all and the Tories face 1993 style Progressive Conservatives in Canada wipeout
  • Options
    ViceroyViceroy Posts: 128
    HYUFD said:


    A 3% decline for one year at most with No Deal with the Brexit Party falling to UKIP 2015 levels, no Brexit at all and the Tories face 1993 style Progressive Conservatives in Canada wipeout

    That's even if a 3% decline would happen. Going by their previous predictions and fortune telling, it would be the complete opposite. Clowns, the lot of them.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    New thread.
This discussion has been closed.