On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
Details of the latest YouGov after Boris was elected Tory leader.....
Looks like the LDs have replaced the Tories as the main party of the middle class....
For a Tory to say that so lightly, as if it were of no consequence, is truly remarkable.
The Tories still lead overall.
In the late 19th century and early 20th century the Liberals often led with middle class voters and the Tories often led with working class voters.
It may be we are moving to a politics based more on culture than class and conservative v liberal as in the USA, Canada and increasingly France as a result of Brexit
On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
It is often easy to mock USA (I'm guilty too) but where would we be without them?
Details of the latest YouGov after Boris was elected Tory leader have the LDs leading with middle class ABC1 voters on 27%, with the Tories second on 25%, Labour third on 18% and the Brexit Party 4th with 14%.
However with working class C2DE voters the Tories lead on 25%, Labour and the Brexit Party are tied for 2nd on 21% each and the LDs are 4th on 17%.
Looks like the LDs have replaced the Tories as the main party of the middle class, the Brexit Party is close to replacing Labour as the new party of the working class and the Boris Tories are classless, getting the same voteshare with middle class and working class voters
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
Double breasted suits look fine. It's the fact they're ten sizes too big for him that's the problem. He's not David Byrne.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
If EU say not to removing the backstop, then the plan is no deal then election shortly afterwards.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
I suspect they are all tailored. I cannot see JRM buying off the peg. He either has a very bad tailor, chooses badly, or simply has not bought new clothes for years and wears ones that no longer fit. I suspect the last. Upper class people are famously stingy in these things.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
Is it not beneath you to use anyone's dress as a basis for criticism? Suppose for example, someone suggested you dress like a tart, how would you judge that? That is a fanciful suggestion because I have no knowledge of nor interest in how you dress.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
It may be we are moving to a politics based more on culture than class and conservative v liberal as in the USA, Canada and increasingly France as a result of Brexit
In some cases has already happened: class is no longer the main predictor of voting behavior, instead libertarian/authoritarian, education level and - more recently - remainvsleave are.
However, whilst I acknowledge that it will happen, I regret the increasing Americanisation of UK politics, particularly as there isn't an obvious read-across. That posting by @isam of Farage spouting the Turning Point version of Socialism genuinely shocked me, and I think we will find ourselves increasingly in a political Procrustean bed, mangling ourselves to fit in with an ill-fitting American mould. Slapping the labels "conservative" and "liberal" on everything is a bad start, as some things just aren't either.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
Is it not beneath you to use anyone's dress as a basis for criticism? Suppose for example, someone suggested you dress like a tart, how would you judge that? That is a fanciful suggestion because I have no knowledge of nor interest in how you dress.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
Just checking in after a wonderful Monteverdi Vespers at Garsington Opera.... this Rees-Mogg thing is a spoof, right?
Dead cat more likely. Look what we are talking about rather than Johnny Foreigner's unfathomable refusal to cower in the face of Boris' resolve and optimism.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
Is it not beneath you to use anyone's dress as a basis for criticism? Suppose for example, someone suggested you dress like a tart, how would you judge that? That is a fanciful suggestion because I have no knowledge of nor interest in how you dress.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
If Keir Starmer became Labour leader many Remainers would get back on board .
Whilst Corbyn is in charge that’s not going to happen because many know he’s anti EU and don’t trust him.
The Lib Dems will use that even if Labours position became more solidly Remain .
Labour cannot win back Remainers with Corbyn in charge. He is not to be trusted. If replaced by Phillips or Watson or Starmer or even Thornbury then a policy shift would be credible, but not otherwise.
Corbyn's problem goes beyond that, it comes to a head in the antisemitism but is much else besides. Look at how his ratings plummeted after the Skripals affair. Centre-left, centre, and even centre-right remain voters who Labour need to counteract the Brexit vote are as unkeen on putting SWP-lite in power as they are Priti Patel and co. Even some on the left have begun to realise they made a big mistake.
Now, in 2017 they were able to fudge it. Not just on Brexit, but because Labour MPs and voters coalesced in part because they thought a wipeout was on the cards, and in part because outside the politically obsessed Corbyn's politics were still seen as cuddly Glasto-friendly leftism. Two years on, the consequences and moral torpor have cut through - I have friends who genuinely couldn't understand why I on the left was so vehemently anti-Corbyn, who now get it, even if some might still vote Labour.
Now, that's not to say the left has turned against Corbyn. Clearly Labour are polling c. 20-25% and the prospect of Johnson and moving to remain might cause some to swallow misgivings. But it's not likely to be enough - and may fail altogether if the Lib Dems have a good summer and Corbyn has a bad one and there's a genuine alternative.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
Is it not beneath you to use anyone's dress as a basis for criticism? Suppose for example, someone suggested you dress like a tart, how would you judge that? That is a fanciful suggestion because I have no knowledge of nor interest in how you dress.
I suspect that @Cyclefree is just showing her Italian roots, such sartorial sensitivity...
It may be we are moving to a politics based more on culture than class and conservative v liberal as in the USA, Canada and increasingly France as a result of Brexit
In some cases has already happened: class is no longer the main predictor of voting behavior, instead libertarian/authoritarian, education level and - more recently - remainvsleave are.
However, whilst I acknowledge that it will happen, I regret the increasing Americanisation of UK politics, particularly as there isn't an obvious read-across. That posting by @isam of Farage spouting the Turning Point version of Socialism genuinely shocked me, and I think we will find ourselves increasingly in a political Procrustean bed, mangling ourselves to fit in with an ill-fitting American mould. Slapping the labels "conservative" and "liberal" on everything is a bad start, as some things just aren't either.
Class has been declining as a voting behaviour predictor for 60 years or more. I wrote an undergraduate paper on it in the mid-eighties. It really isn't a new phenomenon. The only surprise is that the myth of it has lingered so long in the folk memory.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
"Mirrors? What are mirrors?"
If he wants to know what he looks like he orders a portrait.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
From your post, "mess" = "no deal" and I suspect that, if it comes to that, I'm sure Boris will take responsibility for that outcome. How could he do or want to do otherwise?
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
I don't think the EU are unfazed. They are fazed because the realise that there is the possibility of what they regard as the worst possible outcome for them - the UK leaving with no agreement in place at that point. They realise that if there is in place a UK government with a majority sufficient to force that outcome through then the game will be up and they will have to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome that is better for them and which will require them to make concessions. So they are at least worried in a way they were not when May was PM.
However, they have also decided that for the moment that Johnson can't force through that outcome so they will take their chances and back their assessment that when Johnson goes to the country, the result won't give him the majority for Brexit that he seeks. Best then to appear as unfazed and intransigent as possible in the meantime, as any movement would only be portrayed as vindicating Johnson's resolute strategy and would strengthen his polling position going into a GE. If they're wrong, they know they have to come back and give ground in a fairly urgent set of negotiations to deliver a settlement by the New Year.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
From your post, "mess" = "no deal" and I suspect that, if it comes to that, I'm sure Boris will take responsibility for that outcome. How could he do or want to do otherwise?
I mean parliament wouldn't allow him to go to the country and potentially win a big enough majority to push what he wants through. In the specific case where Johnson has forced through a No Deal that they were unable to prevent
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Certainly they are concerned, who isn't?
It doesn't mean that they will change policy though.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
I don't think the EU are unfazed. They are fazed because the realise that there is the possibility of what they regard as the worst possible outcome for them - the UK leaving with no agreement in place at that point. They realise that if there is in place a UK government with a majority sufficient to force that outcome through then the game will be up and they will have to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome that is better for them and which will require them to make concessions. So they are at least worried in a way they were not when May was PM.
However, they have also decided that for the moment that Johnson can't force through that outcome so they will take their chances and back their assessment that when Johnson goes to the country, the result won't give him the majority for Brexit that he seeks. Best then to appear as unfazed and intransigent as possible in the meantime, as any movement would only be portrayed as vindicating Johnson's resolute strategy and would strengthen his polling position going into a GE. If they're wrong, they know they have to come back and give ground in a fairly urgent set of negotiations to deliver a settlement by the New Year.
This may be how things pan out; much more likely than some of the tosh on here. Who knows? What is clear to me is that Boris, for all of his faults, can hardly be worse than May or Corbyn. If Corbyn can also be ditched then some centrist alternative might be viable. Whilst Corbyn, or any of his fellow travellers, are running Labour, then it's a very low bar for any opponent of them.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Fair enough, unfazed is probably the wrong word. More accurately, the EU has shown no sign at any point of conceding on the Backstop. If that's the showstopper, the show will stop and the EU will live with it.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
Double space isn't inherently wrong imho, but it is old fashioned, and, as you say, modern style guides don't allow it.
If you want to do it in your own writing, which you send out without the intervention of a copy editor or a proofer then fine. But you are alerting at least some people to the rough age you went to school. But if you are sending the material in to a publishing house, I suggest you be careful.
Mogg is reflecting the kind of prep schooling he had I suspect.
Were I one of JR-M’s staff, after I had finished laughing, I would write him a short note informing that I would be paying no attention to his “style” guide until such time as he had managed to find, buy and wear every day suits that fitted him.
PS I might also add a PS with a list of good tailors in and around Jermyn Street.
While double breasted does look a bit Eighties (or Twenties...), it is a style that suits a tall thin man.
I have no issue with them being double-breasted. I do with the fact that they clearly don’t fit him. Is there no full-length mirror in the Mogg household?
Is it not beneath you to use anyone's dress as a basis for criticism? Suppose for example, someone suggested you dress like a tart, how would you judge that? That is a fanciful suggestion because I have no knowledge of nor interest in how you dress.
I suspect that @Cyclefree is just showing her Italian roots, such sartorial sensitivity...
The insensitivity may be indicative of more than sartorial sensitivity. I am disappointed as she is usually positively thought provoking .
The logical endpoint of Brexit is me stuck on a wet hill in Helvellyn eating warm piss sandwiches in the rain whilst some rich Leaver [redacted] tells me from their laptop in their Aspen/Alpine second home that I should be more patriotic.
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
I'm reasonably close to EU opinion, and I think they're mildly fazed (in the sense of regretful) but will not give an inch (or a centimetre, depending on which side of this evening's issue you are) on renegotiating the backstop; It doesn't matter if Boris wins a majority of 650.
You're certainly right that not everyone is that engaged. They aren't either - you can read any Continental newspaper and find Brexit only on the Foreign News page, somewhat concerning in the same way as an economic crisis in any neighbouring country.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Certainly they are concerned, who isn't?
It doesn't mean that they will change policy though.
I imagine they will do what they think best. If that is to choose between No Deal and the current deal with no backstop, the choice seems obvious.
As someone mentioned, at the moment they're placing their faith in Parliament somehow finding a way to block No Deal. This faith will diminish over the coming months.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation...
I'm not sure "some tweets" crosses the threshold normally used for concern. I do however have this image of Victoria Wood going "tut".
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
From your post, "mess" = "no deal" and I suspect that, if it comes to that, I'm sure Boris will take responsibility for that outcome. How could he do or want to do otherwise?
I mean parliament wouldn't allow him to go to the country and potentially win a big enough majority to push what he wants through. In the specific case where Johnson has forced through a No Deal that they were unable to prevent
Accepting that Boris cannot call an election without parliamentary approval, does that mean that he's immune from sanction? How does that stop "no deal" if that's what Boris wants? I don't believe he wants that. That's "all in" and he's not got that strong a hand.
The logical endpoint of Brexit is me stuck on a wet hill in Helvellyn eating warm piss sandwiches in the rain whilst some rich Leaver [redacted] tells me from their laptop in their Aspen/Alpine second home that I should be more patriotic.
Can I commend the Crab pasty at Ventnor Botainic gardens on the Isle of Wight. Sounds better than your plan...
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Certainly they are concerned, who isn't?
It doesn't mean that they will change policy though.
I imagine they will do what they think best. If that is to choose between No Deal and the current deal with no backstop, the choice seems obvious.
As someone mentioned, at the moment they're placing their faith in Parliament somehow finding a way to block No Deal. This faith will diminish over the coming months.
I am nearly certain the EU doesn't have any faith in the UK parliament. They have already been burnt in that when May obtained a concession on an all UK Customs Union, only for her to whip against it in the Commons.
I also think the EU parties mean what they say, when they prioritise the Backstop over a potential No Deal. There has been zero evidence so far that is not the case.
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
I'm reasonably close to EU opinion, and I think they're mildly fazed (in the sense of regretful) but will not give an inch (or a centimetre, depending on which side of this evening's issue you are) on renegotiating the backstop; It doesn't matter if Boris wins a majority of 650.
You're certainly right that not everyone is that engaged. They aren't either - you can read any Continental newspaper and find Brexit only on the Foreign News page, somewhat concerning in the same way as an economic crisis in any neighbouring country.
I will be astonished if the EU blinks on all this. But then again it is supposed to be all about functioning, modern democracies, the rule of law and human rights and yet Hungary is still a member.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
You have been told the plan, you are not listening because you believe no deal to be really bad. Clear your mind and think do Patel, Cummings, Raab, Da Costa, JRM, etc, etc, think no deal is bad. There is your answer.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
I don't double space after a full stop. But the three publications in your quote would not be high on my list of arbiters of correct English usage.
I would also be reluctant to accept American arbitration on usage of English. It's our language which they use. I don't object if they play fast and loose with it, but that don't make it right.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
From your post, "mess" = "no deal" and I suspect that, if it comes to that, I'm sure Boris will take responsibility for that outcome. How could he do or want to do otherwise?
I mean parliament wouldn't allow him to go to the country and potentially win a big enough majority to push what he wants through. In the specific case where Johnson has forced through a No Deal that they were unable to prevent
Accepting that Boris cannot call an election without parliamentary approval, does that mean that he's immune from sanction? How does that stop "no deal" if that's what Boris wants? I don't believe he wants that. That's "all in" and he's not got that strong a hand.
It looks like parliament can't stop No Deal. Johnson can't force an election or get parliament to do something it doesn't want to do. The combination is pretty toxic. Whether Johnson will come out on top, I don't know.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Certainly they are concerned, who isn't?
It doesn't mean that they will change policy though.
I imagine they will do what they think best. If that is to choose between No Deal and the current deal with no backstop, the choice seems obvious.
As someone mentioned, at the moment they're placing their faith in Parliament somehow finding a way to block No Deal. This faith will diminish over the coming months.
Yes the choice is obvious. They will back their member state, and that means the Irish backstop. In any case why should they fear No Deal if it is all Project Fear.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
If he's a total bluffer then he ain't 'arf good at it.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
You have been told the plan, you are not listening because you believe no deal to be really bad. Clear your mind and think do Patel, Cummings, Raab, Da Costa, JRM, etc, etc, think no deal is bad. There is your answer.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
I don't double space after a full stop. But the three publications in your quote would not be high on my list of arbiters of correct English usage.
I would also be reluctant to accept American arbitration on usage of English. It's our language which they use. I don't object if they play fast and loose with it, but that don't make it right.
It is not about English usage. Double spacing is a style or typographic issue.
Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong. So is everyone else on pb. The worst offence against both English and common sense is official reports where the lines are double-spaced: a practice that comes from typewritten first drafts to allow room for alterations and the editor's blue pencil. It was rendered pointless by the introduction of word processing and computer typesetting decades ago.
I agree about double spacing lines but will defend wholeheartedly double spacing after fullstops.
Single spacing is the correct way.
I can rest easy tonight, unless ..... you mean after fullstops!
Yes, after full stops!
You are wrong, regretfully. I'm sorry.
No, you are wrong.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
I don't double space after a full stop. But the three publications in your quote would not be high on my list of arbiters of correct English usage.
I would also be reluctant to accept American arbitration on usage of English. It's our language which they use. I don't object if they play fast and loose with it, but that don't make it right.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect? [..] Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
The logical endpoint of Brexit is me stuck on a wet hill in Helvellyn eating warm piss sandwiches in the rain whilst some rich Leaver [redacted] tells me from their laptop in their Aspen/Alpine second home that I should be more patriotic.
On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
TBF, imperial is much more flexible for mental arithmetic (which is what it was invented for).
Measurements are based off known lengths (of a thumb, a foot, elbow to wrist, etc).
Calculations are base 12, allowing for division by 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
Metric works well in the digital world or where calculators are common but is a lot less intuitive.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
Christ, if you were any more shallow, there'd be a hosepipe ban
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
s No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
You have been told the plan, you are not listening because you believe no deal to be really bad. Clear your mind and think do Patel, Cummings, Raab, Da Costa, JRM, etc, etc, think no deal is bad. There is your answer.
Cummings does oppose No Deal.
Of course they all do for the long term or even the short term because they all quote the 17 mini deals as we have a deal. The question to ask is are they prepared to take a period of no deal to get the deal they ultimately want?
The logical endpoint of Brexit is me stuck on a wet hill in Helvellyn eating warm piss sandwiches in the rain whilst some rich Leaver [redacted] tells me from their laptop in their Aspen/Alpine second home that I should be more patriotic.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
s No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
You have been told the plan, you are not listening because you believe no deal to be really bad. Clear your mind and think do Patel, Cummings, Raab, Da Costa, JRM, etc, etc, think no deal is bad. There is your answer.
Cummings does oppose No Deal.
Of course they all do for the long term or even the short term because they all quote the 17 mini deals as we have a deal. The question to ask is are they prepared to take a period of no deal to get the deal they ultimately want?
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Do you think they appear unfazed? We've already seen letters circulated to the member states telling them to keep their cool, and tweets accusing Boris of a bullying tone etc. These are not the actions of a non-concerned organisation.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Certainly they are concerned, who isn't?
It doesn't mean that they will change policy though.
I imagine they will do what they think best. If that is to choose between No Deal and the current deal with no backstop, the choice seems obvious.
As someone mentioned, at the moment they're placing their faith in Parliament somehow finding a way to block No Deal. This faith will diminish over the coming months.
Yes the choice is obvious. They will back their member state, and that means the Irish backstop. In any case why should they fear No Deal if it is all Project Fear.
Except that no deal implies a hard border which is what they claim to oppose most of all
It suggests a bluff in which they are confident because they believe they are stronger than the other side
Boris’s trump card [sic] is that there is a small scintilla of doubt in their mind that he might just be crazy enough to no deal ....
On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
TBF, imperial is much more flexible for mental arithmetic (which is what it was invented for).
Measurements are based off known lengths (of a thumb, a foot, elbow to wrist, etc).
Calculations are base 12, allowing for division by 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
Metric works well in the digital world or where calculators are common but is a lot less intuitive.
An interesting, tho' I suspect minority, view. I'd not thought about it like this before. Ta.
On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
TBF, imperial is much more flexible for mental arithmetic (which is what it was invented for).
Measurements are based off known lengths (of a thumb, a foot, elbow to wrist, etc).
Calculations are base 12, allowing for division by 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
Metric works well in the digital world or where calculators are common but is a lot less intuitive.
An interesting, tho' I suspect minority, view. I'd not thought about it like this before. Ta.
Let’s say you were a peasant with a strip of your own in a field.
Yes Charles, the world moved on. All very quaint, but pointless in the modern day. The PM yesterday was stressing bioscience, fibre broadband for all etc. and then we have this bollocks from JRM. All for effect of course as he deals in international finance in his real job.
Yes Charles, the world moved on. All very quaint, but pointless in the modern day. The PM yesterday was stressing bioscience, fibre broadband for all etc. and then we have this bollocks from JRM. All for effect of course as he deals in international finance in his real job.
Just to be clear - insisting on one form of measurement in government memos is just pedantic bollocks. (I don’t know the context of JRM’s note - I assume it was a style guide of some sort?)
I was pointing out that imperial system has value and uses. Outside of disciplines like engineering where precision matters (and you should have a consistent system) I would let people use whatever they are comfortable with.
To get rid of Cameron and Osborne. I was appalled at the style of politics they brought to this country - the scaremongering at the 2015 election and failed attempt to do likewise at the 2016 London Mayoral election. They both tried the same tactics for the 2016 Referendum and I was keen to deny them a victory. I have no regrets at all - and have never held strong views re-EU membership. The icing on the cake arrived a year later when the Tories lost their majority.
To get rid of Cameron and Osborne. I was appalled at the style of politics they brought to this country - the scaremongering at the 2015 election and failed attempt to do likewise at the 2016 London Mayoral election. They both tried the same tactics for the 2016 Referendum and I was keen to deny them a victory. I have no regrets at all - and have never held strong views re-EU membership. The icing on the cake arrived a year later when the Tories lost their majority.
To get rid of Cameron and Osborne. I was appalled at the style of politics they brought to this country - the scaremongering at the 2015 election and failed attempt to do likewise at the 2016 London Mayoral election. They both tried the same tactics for the 2016 Referendum and I was keen to deny them a victory. I have no regrets at all - and have never held strong views re-EU membership. The icing on the cake arrived a year later when the Tories lost their majority.
Wow. I'm quite shocked.
I’ve rarely seen such a good illustration of why people should not vote Labour: they are a bunch of bairns. Tit for tat. Eye for an eye. Just as antediluvian as Rees-Mogg.
On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
TBF, imperial is much more flexible for mental arithmetic (which is what it was invented for).
Measurements are based off known lengths (of a thumb, a foot, elbow to wrist, etc).
Calculations are base 12, allowing for division by 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
Metric works well in the digital world or where calculators are common but is a lot less intuitive.
An interesting, tho' I suspect minority, view. I'd not thought about it like this before. Ta.
Let’s say you were a peasant with a strip of your own in a field.
6 yards is easier to measure than 4.5 metres.
Therein lies the problem Charles. How many peasants have you, or Jacob Rees-Mogg, ever met?
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
Yes the choice is obvious. They will back their member state, and that means the Irish backstop. In any case why should they fear No Deal if it is all Project Fear.
Except that no deal implies a hard border which is what they claim to oppose most of all
It suggests a bluff in which they are confident because they believe they are stronger than the other side
Boris’s trump card [sic] is that there is a small scintilla of doubt in their mind that he might just be crazy enough to no deal ....
Classic case of psychological projection: the bluff and the doubt are 100% attributes of the UK government. The EU will always, always, back its own member state. It has been one of the few pleasures of the last three years watching little Ireland running absolute rings round bully-boy England. Your comeuppance has been a long time coming.
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
It seems to me Johnson has two policies. One is to go all out on the No Surrender l rhetoric and try to bring the BP members onboard. The other is to declare victory, agree something with the EU and bring the BP boys home to the Conservative Party. Neither policy works on its own but together there are some tricky contradictions to resolve when you are not in control of events.
Two plans? I am not convinced he even has one! just to bullshit and bluster, and hope something turns up. Such is the delusion of optomism...
Maybe. Johnson is unprincipled, dishonest and lacking in responsibility and diligence. But he is smart and he wants to stay as prime minister. I am pretty sure he has a plan. I would like to understand what it is and whether it's likely to succeed.
You have been told the plan, you are not listening because you believe no deal to be really bad. Clear your mind and think do Patel, Cummings, Raab, Da Costa, JRM, etc, etc, think no deal is bad. There is your answer.
I am sure that lot do think No Deal is perfectly fine. It's at least possible, because he says so, thatJohnson does actually think the EU will drop the Backstop and agree the rest, while completing the FTA in 5 years. They won't.
If the plan is as stated it won't work. But if it's simply a pretext for something else, it might do, depending on what it is.
I agree with imperial measures (although I must confess to using Celsius rather than Fahrenheit), but double spaces after full stops seems very archaic. I'm aware this was done and have occasionally seen work by others that way, but it's not something I was ever taught or have done myself.
I'm trying to work out the probabilities of success for Johnson's Brexit strategy on its own terms. So goes into standoff with the EU: if you don't concede totally on Ireland, no Deal.
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says Bingo, they fell into my trap That's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?
--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
"No deal" is the default and if the EU say that May's deal is the only one they will accept, where do you go?
So Parliament can't stop No Deal, but Johnson can't force an election. Nor can he get parliament to cooperate in anything he wants them to do?
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
From your post, "mess" = "no deal" and I suspect that, if it comes to that, I'm sure Boris will take responsibility for that outcome. How could he do or want to do otherwise?
I mean parliament wouldn't allow him to go to the country and potentially win a big enough majority to push what he wants through. In the specific case where Johnson has forced through a No Deal that they were unable to prevent
So Corbyn, who DEMANDED a General Election just the day before yesterday can vote AGAINST a General Election ?
F1: Verstappen's qualifying odds have fallen from 10 to 5.5. Gaping chasm on Betfair (1.3 to back, 10 to lay) but might be able to hedge, if that's your cup of tea, once things get going.
There's also a qualifying without the big 6 market (Ladbrokes).
On imperial measurements, I'm also an engineer and I have never once in my career over the last ten years encountered a single imperial measurement outside of weird shit that the Americans send us. They make the mathematics harder than it needs to be, they don't work with a lot of electrical engineering units and they cause confusion when you have to convert between them. Please lets just kill them.
My favourite American unit is acre-feet as a unit of volume.
TBF, imperial is much more flexible for mental arithmetic (which is what it was invented for).
Measurements are based off known lengths (of a thumb, a foot, elbow to wrist, etc).
Calculations are base 12, allowing for division by 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
Metric works well in the digital world or where calculators are common but is a lot less intuitive.
An interesting, tho' I suspect minority, view. I'd not thought about it like this before. Ta.
Let’s say you were a peasant with a strip of your own in a field.
6 yards is easier to measure than 4.5 metres.
Therein lies the problem Charles. How many peasants have you, or Jacob Rees-Mogg, ever met?
I'm sure that both examples cited above think everyone they meet is a peasant.
Yes Charles, the world moved on. All very quaint, but pointless in the modern day. The PM yesterday was stressing bioscience, fibre broadband for all etc. and then we have this bollocks from JRM. All for effect of course as he deals in international finance in his real job.
Just to be clear - insisting on one form of measurement in government memos is just pedantic bollocks. (I don’t know the context of JRM’s note - I assume it was a style guide of some sort?)
I was pointing out that imperial system has value and uses. Outside of disciplines like engineering where precision matters (and you should have a consistent system) I would let people use whatever they are comfortable with.
Outside of baking, the imperial system is a pointless anachronism. Unless the government is sending around carrot cake recipes this instruction from Lord Snooty is ridiculous.
Comments
In the late 19th century and early 20th century the Liberals often led with middle class voters and the Tories often led with working class voters.
It may be we are moving to a politics based more on culture than class and conservative v liberal as in the USA, Canada and increasingly France as a result of Brexit
The aim appears to be to goad the EU into turning him down so he can blame them for intransigence. Possibly he hopes the EU will fold.
The EU appear to be totally unfazed. In effect, come back when you are serious. Will it work? Leavers likely will blame the EU, but they do that anyway. In any case they just want to go straight to No Deal because they don't want anything to do with the EU or Europe, ever. Remainers will despise everything Johnson does. The small band of could-be-convinceds I suspect will wonder why he doesn't just get on with the deal.
Next step parliament. So he goes to parliament and says, No Deal it is. Parliament says No to No Deal. Johnson says
Bingo, they fell into my trapThat's outrageous! You are thwarting democracy. Could you help me out please by calling an election so I can thrash you all?--- Am I missing part of the cunning plan?
However, whilst I acknowledge that it will happen, I regret the increasing Americanisation of UK politics, particularly as there isn't an obvious read-across. That posting by @isam of Farage spouting the Turning Point version of Socialism genuinely shocked me, and I think we will find ourselves increasingly in a political Procrustean bed, mangling ourselves to fit in with an ill-fitting American mould. Slapping the labels "conservative" and "liberal" on everything is a bad start, as some things just aren't either.
If I were one of Johnson's many political opponents, I would make sure he owns the mess.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1154875336137543685
Now, in 2017 they were able to fudge it. Not just on Brexit, but because Labour MPs and voters coalesced in part because they thought a wipeout was on the cards, and in part because outside the politically obsessed Corbyn's politics were still seen as cuddly Glasto-friendly leftism. Two years on, the consequences and moral torpor have cut through - I have friends who genuinely couldn't understand why I on the left was so vehemently anti-Corbyn, who now get it, even if some might still vote Labour.
Now, that's not to say the left has turned against Corbyn. Clearly Labour are polling c. 20-25% and the prospect of Johnson and moving to remain might cause some to swallow misgivings. But it's not likely to be enough - and may fail altogether if the Lib Dems have a good summer and Corbyn has a bad one and there's a genuine alternative.
By about 1950, most house styles had dropped the double space and agreed to use a single space in all instances. Today, almost every major style guide recommends this, including The Economist, the Guardian and the Chicago Manual of Style.
So, given this general consensus, is using two spaces after a full stop actually incorrect?
Some say it is, and pretty unequivocally too. It’s ‘totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong’, according to American journalist Farhad Manjoo, writing on Slate.com. Worse, says Telegraph columnist Damian Thompson, it’s a ‘typographical atrocity’.
https://www.writing-skills.com/one-space-two-full-stop
However, they have also decided that for the moment that Johnson can't force through that outcome so they will take their chances and back their assessment that when Johnson goes to the country, the result won't give him the majority for Brexit that he seeks. Best then to appear as unfazed and intransigent as possible in the meantime, as any movement would only be portrayed as vindicating Johnson's resolute strategy and would strengthen his polling position going into a GE. If they're wrong, they know they have to come back and give ground in a fairly urgent set of negotiations to deliver a settlement by the New Year.
As to the rest of your post, you seem to believe that everyone has become as invested in either Leave or Remain as we on PB are. They're not.
Immediately before writing CHECK your work?!
It doesn't mean that they will change policy though.
If you want to do it in your own writing, which you send out without the intervention of a copy editor or a proofer then fine. But you are alerting at least some people to the rough age you went to school. But if you are sending the material in to a publishing house, I suggest you be careful.
Mogg is reflecting the kind of prep schooling he had I suspect.
You're certainly right that not everyone is that engaged. They aren't either - you can read any Continental newspaper and find Brexit only on the Foreign News page, somewhat concerning in the same way as an economic crisis in any neighbouring country.
As someone mentioned, at the moment they're placing their faith in Parliament somehow finding a way to block No Deal. This faith will diminish over the coming months.
The Chicago Manual of Style is the US bible.
I also think the EU parties mean what they say, when they prioritise the Backstop over a potential No Deal. There has been zero evidence so far that is not the case.
Measurements are based off known lengths (of a thumb, a foot, elbow to wrist, etc).
Calculations are base 12, allowing for division by 2, 3, 4, 6 and 12.
Metric works well in the digital world or where calculators are common but is a lot less intuitive.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/24/boris-johnson-claims-of-side-deals-are-rubbish-eu-says
It suggests a bluff in which they are confident because they believe they are stronger than the other side
Boris’s trump card [sic] is that there is a small scintilla of doubt in their mind that he might just be crazy enough to no deal ....
6 yards is easier to measure than 4.5 metres.
I was pointing out that imperial system has value and uses. Outside of disciplines like engineering where precision matters (and you should have a consistent system) I would let people use whatever they are comfortable with.
If the plan is as stated it won't work. But if it's simply a pretext for something else, it might do, depending on what it is.
I agree with imperial measures (although I must confess to using Celsius rather than Fahrenheit), but double spaces after full stops seems very archaic. I'm aware this was done and have occasionally seen work by others that way, but it's not something I was ever taught or have done myself.
There's also a qualifying without the big 6 market (Ladbrokes).
With iOS, two spaces (i.e., space bar double tap) make a full point and a single space.
Oh, well. I don't suppose there are any iPads over there in the 18th century.