For those wanting a break from Brexit and following the US, looks like Warren is becoming the front runner. She led the impeachment push, has overtaken Biden nationally, and is now ahead in California (which screws Harris).
My tips for vice-president:
- Pete Buttigieg - Cory Booker - Andrew Gillum
Ah, now the whole Biden angle is starting to make sense.
Smart move from Warren lol
I'm sure this point has been made before but I think Warren is very well placed in a three way contest with Biden and Sanders as I imagine she would pick up the majority of support if either of the other two candidates were to withdraw.
Hmm I reckon all three are in for a long time yet. Though Sanders seems to have dropped behind the other two right now.
Should that also apply to siblings? Grand parents? Cousins? Uncles & Aunts? Second Cousins? Should someone with six wives be able to bring them all to the UK? What about step brothers? Half sisters? Foster parents?
At some point a condition needs to be set. They may be difficult and uncomfortable decisions to have to make. Grown up politics is discussing what the limits should be, not calling for unconditional migration or no migration.
You will note that in my comments above I said that I would "qualify or limit" some of it. The examples you cite illustrate that setting those limits will be important. Generally I would limit it to parents, spouses and children. But I would allow flexibility and sensitivity, eg if your niece were orphaned she could join you in the UK so you could bring her up, subject to verification that it isn't a scam. My starting point is that the family is the building block of society and immigration policy should allow people to enjoy stable and happy family life, something it clearly fails to do now.
I would agree with your desired outcomes. I do not think it is consistent with the Labour proposal, which I expect wont make their manifesto in anything like its current format.
The policy proposal is at best very poorly worded and therefore open to spin against it, I think in reality it is just poorly thought out, lazy and would be open to extreme abuse if ever implemented.
I agree, I would be surprised if it made the manifesto without serious qualification. It's important to remember that these are grassroots proposals, not polished policies created by a party machine. I don't agree with them if taken to an extreme. But I welcome the fact that Labour is discussing immigration in a humane and rational way and not just cowering in fear of the Tabloid press. I think the basic thrust of the proposals is the correct one, and in politics I think you should be in the business of fighting for what you believe in rather than living in constant fear of how your enemies will spin it.
Fear is the wrong word, but an understanding of how it will be perceived, not just by enemies but more importantly by potential floating voters has to be key for any political party looking to make the world better.
Otherwise they are just a talking shop for idealists. If they cannot be bothered to think about how their policies and actions are perceived, that will result in a failed and reckless government continuing. That is where I and the vast majority of floating voters think Labour are now, hence their problems in the polls.
What I don't get about the Hinkley C news is the excuse of "challenging ground conditions".
I can understand this on a project dispersed over a large area - say a road or railway - but this is a small area - right next door to where there is already 2 power stations. The ground conditions should have been blooming well known before they began.
I just don't believe it as an excuse.
How very odd. It is in classic Lower Lias country - Lias limestones and clays with plenty of ground water, a combination which is (in general) apt to slip on slopes - Lyme Regis, Leicestershire/Oxon valley cambering, etc. ( and ?Blisworth?). But that is a flat site and people have known about the Lias's problems for ca 200 years now. No mention of slips on an admittedly very quick look at this
Fear is the wrong word, but an understanding of how it will be perceived, not just by enemies but more importantly by potential floating voters has to be key for any political party looking to make the world better.
Otherwise they are just a talking shop for idealists. If they cannot be bothered to think about how their policies and actions are perceived, that will result in a failed and reckless government continuing. That is where I and the vast majority of floating voters think Labour are now, hence their problems in the polls.
Yes I agree with you on that. I am by no means a Corbynista, more of a centrist dad really, and I despair of the party's presentation skills. But I feel quite strongly that immigration is an issue where Labour need to make a case for a different approach rather than simply triangulate. If done effectively I think it could actually pay dividends with voters. But perhaps I am being naive.
Comments
Otherwise they are just a talking shop for idealists. If they cannot be bothered to think about how their policies and actions are perceived, that will result in a failed and reckless government continuing. That is where I and the vast majority of floating voters think Labour are now, hence their problems in the polls.
https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/EN010001/EN010001-005202-HPC-NNBPEA-XX-000-RET-000224 1.pdf
revoked