I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
Do you mean her personal taxes or her tax policy?
In terms of the "raising taxes" argument, I've seen Bernie and a few surrogates say it is actually a tax cut, and I think Warren will do the same eventually. She can easily argue mandatory private insurance is just a private tax (like tax farming), and that by bringing it back to the public purse will increase your government taxes, but reduce your overall "taxation". The word "tax" has lots of power in the US way of arguing, but I think this will become the new norm when discussing Medicare for All / single payer / public option.
Seems a point less trip, the EU will offer an extension if asked so theres no worries, it's in parliaments hands whether theres a deal to vote down or not.
You just haven't got this whole pointless gesture thing, have you?
Grieve and co have played a much more astute game than Cummings.
Grieve has had it easy, with 400 MPs quietly (or otherwise) urging him on - and determinedly blocking off any route to the voters.
Whether that plays well long term has yet to be seen. If we still end up with Brexit and a House shorn of its Europhile MPs, some may think Cummings has had the last laugh.....
Antoinette Sandbach has been overwhelmingly deselected by her consituency in her safe seat of Eddisbury
MarquesMarks said: "Our MPs should be made to do their jobs - and be the final arbiters on this deal, to implement Brexit as they promised their voters they would."
The trouble is that many of the MPs who voted Remain promised that they would honour the referendum result but didn`t really mean it. They were scared of their particular electorate rather than standing up for what they really thought. This wss always going to end badly.
My MP is one of the Whipless Wonders: Ed Vaizey. Now, I don't agree with him politically, but he, like many others, is being painted as a closet Remainer who has conspired to overthrow the pure and noble Will of the Peepul.
He has voted for Brexit at virtually every opportunity. The only thing he has v oted against - in the final push - is No Deal Brexit. He has voted for the WA on every possible occasion (far more so than Boris). He voted for the WA-plus-a-Customs-Union, for the WA-plus-Common-Market-2.0, for the WA-plus-a-referendum, for anything he could vote for to get a Brexit Deal through.
He wouldn't, though, stand for a No Deal Brexit, probably because he actually stopped and considered what that meant for everyone.
As I say, I don't agree with his politics on many other things, but I think it's criminally unfair to paint him - and many others - as "Remainers" when he's bent over backwards to try to get a Deal through.
But too many people have their simplistic, dishonest BETRAYAL narrative. It's easy, it "explains" things, it makes themselves the morally superior while their opponents are cads and traitors, and it avoids them having the cognitive workload of actually having to think. So there's no chance they'll change that, is there?
MarquesMarks said: "Our MPs should be made to do their jobs - and be the final arbiters on this deal, to implement Brexit as they promised their voters they would."
The trouble is that many of the MPs who voted Remain promised that they would honour the referendum result but didn`t really mean it. They were scared of their particular electorate rather than standing up for what they really thought. This wss always going to end badly.
My MP is one of the Whipless Wonders: Ed Vaizey. Now, I don't agree with him politically, but he, like many others, is being painted as a closet Remainer who has conspired to overthrow the pure and noble Will of the Peepul.
He has voted for Brexit at virtually every opportunity. The only thing he has v oted against - in the final push - is No Deal Brexit. He has voted for the WA on every possible occasion (far more so than Boris). He voted for the WA-plus-a-Customs-Union, for the WA-plus-Common-Market-2.0, for the WA-plus-a-referendum, for anything he could vote for to get a Brexit Deal through.
He wouldn't, though, stand for a No Deal Brexit, probably because he actually stopped and considered what that meant for everyone.
As I say, I don't agree with his politics on many other things, but I think it's criminally unfair to paint him - and many others - as "Remainers" when he's bent over backwards to try to get a Deal through.
But too many people have their simplistic, dishonest BETRAYAL narrative. It's easy, it "explains" things, it makes themselves the morally superior while their opponents are cads and traitors, and it avoids them having the cognitive workload of actually having to think. So there's no chance they'll change that, is there?
Off topic but in the vain hope we can talk about something other than whatever gruel is being prepared for the DUP and ERG to sample, some comment on the Queen's Speech:
As usual with Johnson, very long on generalities and very short on anything approaching specifics. A word like "devolution" can mean anything to anyone. Is Boris advocating regional assemblies or simply giving more central Government largesse (no doubt with strings attached) to Councils?
Then of course there's the small matter of reforming adult social care which is once again dressed up in aspirations but is devoid of real content. In my view, that is going to be the defining policy issue of post-EU Britain. How are we going to treat older people not just in terms of care but in more general terms? I see a growing trend away from treating them as a separate social group and more to re-integrating them within working society but end of life or palliative care remains one of those very difficult areas for public debate and discussion which I suspect Johnson will go nowhere near.
I think the reality is that whoever wins the next working majority will probably have promised “free” social care isn’t it? Sensible insurance based models aren’t going to get votes, and the barest beginnings of the sorts of sensible reforms to get where you suggest (NI for working pensioners, for example) are going to be electoral kryptonite. It’s depressing but I think pensioners are going to start to cost even more, and get even more comfy. When can I retire?
Sigh... Please tell me I’m wrong.
When you get to those sunny uplands you will be wishing you were young again, banish the envy and enjoy being your age and realise you will never see it again. If it was possible to swap you would be inundated with requests.
I think the reality is that whoever wins the next working majority will probably have promised “free” social care isn’t it? Sensible insurance based models aren’t going to get votes, and the barest beginnings of the sorts of sensible reforms to get where you suggest (NI for working pensioners, for example) are going to be electoral kryptonite. It’s depressing but I think pensioners are going to start to cost even more, and get even more comfy. When can I retire? Sigh... Please tell me I’m wrong.
Yes, this is the irony. The sheer voting power of the elderly gives them the whip hand. I'm sure as @HYUFD will tell us the Conservatives have dominated the 65+ age group since 2001 (I think). That of course means no Party reliant on a core vote is going to suggest policies aimed at antagonising that core vote (ditto for Labour and the Unions of course) unless they are prepared to argue the case and accept the consequences of losing the argument.
We cannot go on as we are and I think NI for working pensioners is sellable as a policy for all the howls of outrage it will provoke. Care is a much harder question to resolve and we often forget the numbers requiring care are a small proportion of the elderly population and it's not just about dementia care - it also means helping those families who take on the care of elderly relatives.
You have to say 2010-2013 was the best chance to make some changes, and it didn’t happen. And we’re now left with one hell of a demographic risk. I guess the best that can be hoped for is a party coming to power with a good majority, having mostly managed to stay silent on pensioner perks, and relying on young folks for its votes. So a Labour/LibDem coalition hunting for savings?
They did make changes.
They introduced triple lock pensions to benefit the oldies even more.
And tripled student tuition fees to make things worse at the other end.
Speaking of which did the QS mention student tuition fees at all ?
Given that the ONS is not including the student bad debt in the government borrowing figures there's a £10bn plus annual opportunity to reduce tuition fees.
Perhaps Javid is going to reveal something in his Budget or maybe it is being kept for the GE manifesto.
If not it means the Conservatives are even more incompetent and in denial than already suspected.
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
MarquesMarks said: "Our MPs should be made to do their jobs - and be the final arbiters on this deal, to implement Brexit as they promised their voters they would."
The trouble is that many of the MPs who voted Remain promised that they would honour the referendum result but didn`t really mean it. They were scared of their particular electorate rather than standing up for what they really thought. This wss always going to end badly.
My MP is one of the Whipless Wonders: Ed Vaizey. Now, I don't agree with him politically, but he, like many others, is being painted as a closet Remainer who has conspired to overthrow the pure and noble Will of the Peepul.
He has voted for Brexit at virtually every opportunity. The only thing he has v oted against - in the final push - is No Deal Brexit. He has voted for the WA on every possible occasion (far more so than Boris). He voted for the WA-plus-a-Customs-Union, for the WA-plus-Common-Market-2.0, for the WA-plus-a-referendum, for anything he could vote for to get a Brexit Deal through.
He wouldn't, though, stand for a No Deal Brexit, probably because he actually stopped and considered what that meant for everyone.
As I say, I don't agree with his politics on many other things, but I think it's criminally unfair to paint him - and many others - as "Remainers" when he's bent over backwards to try to get a Deal through.
But too many people have their simplistic, dishonest BETRAYAL narrative. It's easy, it "explains" things, it makes themselves the morally superior while their opponents are cads and traitors, and it avoids them having the cognitive workload of actually having to think. So there's no chance they'll change that, is there?
Absolutely.
There's a good Finkelstein article in the Times this morning pointing out that people are far more amenable to accepting that they were wrong about particular facts than is often thought - but that acceptance doesn't change their beliefs, which the facts contradict, one iota.
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
Do you mean her personal taxes or her tax policy?
In terms of the "raising taxes" argument, I've seen Bernie and a few surrogates say it is actually a tax cut, and I think Warren will do the same eventually. She can easily argue mandatory private insurance is just a private tax (like tax farming), and that by bringing it back to the public purse will increase your government taxes, but reduce your overall "taxation". The word "tax" has lots of power in the US way of arguing, but I think this will become the new norm when discussing Medicare for All / single payer / public option.
It won't as it will also be attacked as 'socialised healthcare' too, there is significantly more opposition to Medicare for all than a public option
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I agree with you that she's the frontrunner, and that she's a weak candidate for the ge. Where I think we disagree is I think she's a better candidate than Biden, and I also think she's still more likely to beat Trump than lose
As this deal - if one is produced at all - is proffered later then it's inherent contradictions and pleases nobody nature surely will force lengthy scrutiny of the deal on both sides of the channel.
Johnson will have to extend. And then go out campaigning for a deal worse than the previous one that the most ardent Brexit supporters consider to be a betrayal.
Nailed on Tory landslide obviously
I don't think people (ie, voters) really understood TM's deal at all. Very little was actually solved. Just the 21 month transition period, the aim to work towards a FTA, and a 'backstop' arrangement leaving NI in the SM and CU and the rest of the UK in the CU if a FTA couldn't be agreed in time.
Let's be honest, I'm sure someone will pop up to tell me I've got THAT wrong and if a political wonk doesn't understand the deal, the average punter on the street certainly isn't.
The average voter was told it (TM's deal) was a shit deal, because Labour said so, Lib Dems said so, the SNP said so, DUP said so and half the Tories said so. Therefore its a shit deal.
If this new improved sparkly deal has the DUP and all the Tories on board, then its clearly better because now only Lab, LD and SNP oppose.
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
"COULD NOT HOLD OFF BEIJING"?????
Where's your ambition, man?
Your typical cowardly bully, he shows perfectly the caliber of the Tories and Westminster in general. Cowardly bullies, oppress the little boys and lick the butts of the big boys.
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I agree with you that she's the frontrunner, and that she's a weak candidate for the ge. Where I think we disagree is I think she's a better candidate than Biden, and I also think she's still more likely to beat Trump than lose
I mean with current polling averages, she seems more likely than Sanders or Biden to win Florida in a GE, and she does well in swing states.
So dom grieve is meeting the EU demanding a delay to brexit and makes a referendum a condition on any deal...who put him in charge if the UK negotiating position?
If Boris gets a deal agreed I think he will get near enough all of the tory and ex-tory vote on-board for it. ERG are not completely stupid, they can see no deal is dead, so a bad deal is all that's left. Mostof the tory remainer Rebels were OK with May's deal so will probably vote for Boris'. On the flip side I really don't see Labour MPs voting for the deal anymore than they did Theresa May's, with perhaps a few exceptions. There are 3 constants in life: death, taxes, and Lisa Nandy saying she wants to vote for a deal, just not this deal.
I think Boris may just have the numbers to squeeze through his deal, and suspect there are still not quite the numbers for a second ref. Could come down to 1 or 2 votes deciding it
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
"COULD NOT HOLD OFF BEIJING"?????
Where's your ambition, man?
Your typical cowardly bully, he shows perfectly the caliber of the Tories and Westminster in general. Cowardly bullies, oppress the little boys and lick the butts of the big boys.
No, just realistic.
When we had the full British Empire and India we might have held off China (and it was a Labour government which gave India independence).
Now we can still hold off most nations but no longer the USA, China and probably not Russia either on our own
Canadians like to make their minds up in the last four or five days before polling and are not averse to wildly zig-zagging their vote.
This year, it’s the BQ surging and NDP ticking up (a bit). That will hurt the Liberals as they’ll lose seats in Quebec (the Tories won’t be too badly affected there) and the NDP will hurt their vote share in Ontario, thereby helping the Tories win a few more seats there.
What I can’t see is Scheer forming a Government.
You may be right in terms of minds being made up - we'll see.
Ontario and Quebec alone have 199 of the 338 ridings so they are critical. The Liberal majority in 2015 was built on taking 96 seats from the Conservatives and doing very well in areas like Toronto and Winnipeg and wiping out the Conservatives in the east. It's hard to know how this will go with some Greens polling strongly and the PPC challenging sitting Conservatives in some seats.
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
Do you mean her personal taxes or her tax policy?
In terms of the "raising taxes" argument, I've seen Bernie and a few surrogates say it is actually a tax cut, and I think Warren will do the same eventually. She can easily argue mandatory private insurance is just a private tax (like tax farming), and that by bringing it back to the public purse will increase your government taxes, but reduce your overall "taxation". The word "tax" has lots of power in the US way of arguing, but I think this will become the new norm when discussing Medicare for All / single payer / public option.
It won't as it will also be attacked as 'socialised healthcare' too, there is significantly more opposition to Medicare for all than a public option
Medicare for all is less popular than just a public option, but last time I checked the average of polls put it at plurality (if not bare majority) positive view. And "socialism" is an increasingly ineffective catch all for the GOP. More young people like the idea, and fewer old people are swing voters. Also the idea that Medicare for all is a quick and easy way to sort the issue is appealing; cuts red tape, reduces government (and private sector) bureaucracy (whether this is true or not, most people who have Medicare view it positively, and most people understand Medicare).
I just don't see the GOP, who have previously run on gutting all social safety nets, and Trump, who has in the past said he is happy with single payer, will be trusted messengers on healthcare.
I think Warren could win a GE on Medicare for all. Would it pass a Dem controlled Congress, on the other hand, I don't know.
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
"COULD NOT HOLD OFF BEIJING"?????
Where's your ambition, man?
Your typical cowardly bully, he shows perfectly the caliber of the Tories and Westminster in general. Cowardly bullies, oppress the little boys and lick the butts of the big boys.
No, just realistic.
When we had the full British Empire and India we might have held off China (and it was a Labour government which gave India independence).
Now we can still hold off most nations but no longer the USA, China and probably not Russia either on our own
What about THE EU?
Given the circs an' all, might be important to know. What's your feeling?
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
Do you mean her personal taxes or her tax policy?
In terms of the "raising taxes" argument, I've seen Bernie and a few surrogates say it is actually a tax cut, and I think Warren will do the same eventually. She can easily argue mandatory private insurance is just a private tax (like tax farming), and that by bringing it back to the public purse will increase your government taxes, but reduce your overall "taxation". The word "tax" has lots of power in the US way of arguing, but I think this will become the new norm when discussing Medicare for All / single payer / public option.
It won't as it will also be attacked as 'socialised healthcare' too, there is significantly more opposition to Medicare for all than a public option
Medicare for all is less popular than just a public option, but last time I checked the average of polls put it at plurality (if not bare majority) positive view. And "socialism" is an increasingly ineffective catch all for the GOP. More young people like the idea, and fewer old people are swing voters. Also the idea that Medicare for all is a quick and easy way to sort the issue is appealing; cuts red tape, reduces government (and private sector) bureaucracy (whether this is true or not, most people who have Medicare view it positively, and most people understand Medicare).
I just don't see the GOP, who have previously run on gutting all social safety nets, and Trump, who has in the past said he is happy with single payer, will be trusted messengers on healthcare.
I think Warren could win a GE on Medicare for all. Would it pass a Dem controlled Congress, on the other hand, I don't know.
Possibly - but the public option is wildly popular in the context of deeply divided US politics, with recent polls indicating almost three quarters of the electorate favouring it. Which would make it relatively simple to get through Congress.
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
"COULD NOT HOLD OFF BEIJING"?????
Where's your ambition, man?
Your typical cowardly bully, he shows perfectly the caliber of the Tories and Westminster in general. Cowardly bullies, oppress the little boys and lick the butts of the big boys.
No, just realistic.
When we had the full British Empire and India we might have held off China (and it was a Labour government which gave India independence).
Now we can still hold off most nations but no longer the USA, China and probably not Russia either on our own
What about THE EU?
Given the circs an' all, might be important to know. What's your feeling?
The EU does not spend enough on defence, it is an economic superpower not a military one and I doubt even Juncker would invade to stop Brexit
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I agree with you that she's the frontrunner, and that she's a weak candidate for the ge. Where I think we disagree is I think she's a better candidate than Biden, and I also think she's still more likely to beat Trump than lose
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
Do you mean her personal taxes or her tax policy?
In terms of the "raising taxes" argument, I've seen Bernie and a few surrogates say it is actually a tax cut, and I think Warren will do the same eventually. She can easily argue mandatory private insurance is just a private tax (like tax farming), and that by bringing it back to the public purse will increase your government taxes, but reduce your overall "taxation". The word "tax" has lots of power in the US way of arguing, but I think this will become the new norm when discussing Medicare for All / single payer / public option.
It won't as it will also be attacked as 'socialised healthcare' too, there is significantly more opposition to Medicare for all than a public option
Medicare for all is less popular than just a public option, but last time I checked the average of polls put it at plurality (if not bare majority) positive view. And "socialism" is an increasingly ineffective catch all for the GOP. More young people like the idea, and fewer old people are swing voters. Also the idea that Medicare for all is a quick and easy way to sort the issue is appealing; cuts red tape, reduces government (and private sector) bureaucracy (whether this is true or not, most people who have Medicare view it positively, and most people understand Medicare).
I just don't see the GOP, who have previously run on gutting all social safety nets, and Trump, who has in the past said he is happy with single payer, will be trusted messengers on healthcare.
I think Warren could win a GE on Medicare for all. Would it pass a Dem controlled Congress, on the other hand, I don't know.
Independents are split on Medicare for all but favour a public option, Republicans strongly oppose Medicare for All.
It is a wedge issue Trump could exploit especially as it is the Electoral College not the popular vote that wins the presidency
So dom grieve is meeting the EU demanding a delay to brexit and makes a referendum a condition on any deal...who put him in charge if the UK negotiating position?
I'm amazed he's asking them to take No Deal off the table. His last chance is today. The only way he can 'win' is by having the EU NOT offer a Deal.
If a new deal is agreed today, and if it looks likely that deal will pass the HoC (forget whats in it, that really doesn't matter) then both Remain and Farage's Brexit party lose today. Probably forever.
This is it for Grieve. His only hope is that the EU add a late condition, like slaughter of all first born British citizens, because he's about to be totally and utterly fucked. And he knows it.
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
"COULD NOT HOLD OFF BEIJING"?????
Where's your ambition, man?
Your typical cowardly bully, he shows perfectly the caliber of the Tories and Westminster in general. Cowardly bullies, oppress the little boys and lick the butts of the big boys.
No, just realistic.
When we had the full British Empire and India we might have held off China (and it was a Labour government which gave India independence).
Now we can still hold off most nations but no longer the USA, China and probably not Russia either on our own
What about THE EU?
Given the circs an' all, might be important to know. What's your feeling?
The EU does not spend enough on defence, it is an economic superpower not a military one and I doubt even Juncker would invade to stop Brexit
Understand. But we weren't talking about specific reasons for invasion. You reckon we could hold off everyone apart from the USA, China and Russia (probably). What about the EU?
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Still within the margin of error and as Quebec showed in 1995, when it is close Don't Knows go No
Alright, you count the don't knows on your side if it makes you feel better. I don't have a side so I'll not argue the toss, but that's pretty questionable.
I think it fair to say that Mar/Apr/May GE has become more likely. Accordingly, Betfair`s 5.2 on Corbyn exit date being April - June looks tasty I`d say.
So dom grieve is meeting the EU demanding a delay to brexit and makes a referendum a condition on any deal...who put him in charge if the UK negotiating position?
This is why we really need a GE. There are too many MPs who are just representing themselves. They know that they will be gone as soon as their constituents have their say.
Canadians like to make their minds up in the last four or five days before polling and are not averse to wildly zig-zagging their vote.
This year, it’s the BQ surging and NDP ticking up (a bit). That will hurt the Liberals as they’ll lose seats in Quebec (the Tories won’t be too badly affected there) and the NDP will hurt their vote share in Ontario, thereby helping the Tories win a few more seats there.
What I can’t see is Scheer forming a Government.
You may be right in terms of minds being made up - we'll see.
Ontario and Quebec alone have 199 of the 338 ridings so they are critical. The Liberal majority in 2015 was built on taking 96 seats from the Conservatives and doing very well in areas like Toronto and Winnipeg and wiping out the Conservatives in the east. It's hard to know how this will go with some Greens polling strongly and the PPC challenging sitting Conservatives in some seats.
The Liberals still lead in Ontario on average 37% to 33% for the Conservatives and in Quebec on 32% to 16% for the Conservatives even if the Conservatives lead the Liberals 32% to 31% across Canada as a whole due to a huge Conservative lead in Alberta where the Conservatives are on 63% to just 15% for the Liberals.
So the Conservatives winning the popular vote but the Liberals narrowly winning most seats looks possible. http://338canada.com
So dom grieve is meeting the EU demanding a delay to brexit and makes a referendum a condition on any deal...who put him in charge of the UK negotiating position?
So dom grieve is meeting the EU demanding a delay to brexit and makes a referendum a condition on any deal...who put him in charge if the UK negotiating position?
I'm nicely green on Mayor Pete but a word of caution - when I discussed this some time ago with an American friend of mine he had a) never heard of Mayor Pete; and b) said with some confidence that Warren would get the Dem nomination.
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I agree with you that she's the frontrunner, and that she's a weak candidate for the ge. Where I think we disagree is I think she's a better candidate than Biden, and I also think she's still more likely to beat Trump than lose
Yeah, but Ohio is not the tipping swing state in the current climate. If a Democrat is winning Ohio they have probably already won enough Electoral College points to get the GE. Easier wins in Nev, Penn, Mich, Wisc, and even potentially Florida mean Ohio may not matter. Due to the nature of which states vote similarly, Ohio is not the tell tale swing state it may have been previously.
Also, I'm not really comfortable with your general spotlights on single polls, and personally prefer poll aggregates. The aggregate of all polls show all three of Biden, Sanders and Warren beating Trump in Ohio:
Looks like The Clown has caved in: N Ireland to remain in the Single Market. The DUP are going to go mental. Or rather, even more mental.
And Spain probably going to imposes Direct Rule in Catalonia.
Would all these old imperial powers not be better off just letting the remaining bits of empire go? Better being friendly neighbours than grumpy lodgers.
Ah, that lazy imperial suggestion crops up. NI will probably have a majority for reunification soon, but up to now has not wanted to be 'let go'. What, the UK should split itself up even when the bit split off didnt want to be? Not caring what the locals want sounds awfully imperial of you, if trends are right they will leave in good time by their choice, not be 'let go'.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
"COULD NOT HOLD OFF BEIJING"?????
Where's your ambition, man?
Your typical cowardly bully, he shows perfectly the caliber of the Tories and Westminster in general. Cowardly bullies, oppress the little boys and lick the butts of the big boys.
No, just realistic.
When we had the full British Empire and India we might have held off China (and it was a Labour government which gave India independence).
Now we can still hold off most nations but no longer the USA, China and probably not Russia either on our own
What about THE EU?
Given the circs an' all, might be important to know. What's your feeling?
The EU does not spend enough on defence, it is an economic superpower not a military one and I doubt even Juncker would invade to stop Brexit
Understand. But we weren't talking about specific reasons for invasion. You reckon we could hold off everyone apart from the USA, China and Russia (probably). What about the EU?
Without France probably, with France we might need to do a pact with Trump.
France to be fair still has a half decent military it invests in and is the only EU nation with nuclear weapons like us
I'm nicely green on Mayor Pete but a word of caution - when I discussed this some time ago with an American friend of mine he had a) never heard of Mayor Pete; and b) said with some confidence that Warren would get the Dem nomination.
I'm nicely green on Mayor Pete but a word of caution - when I discussed this some time ago with an American friend of mine he had a) never heard of Mayor Pete; and b) said with some confidence that Warren would get the Dem nomination.
Another note of caution - he's still around 0% in South Carolina polling.
The poll was the referendum. Its the only poll that counts...
I find it strange that you keep pushing this line. Don't you realise that there is a decision to be made? Even if you take leave as a given -- which I don't, but just for the sake of argument -- there's still the nature of the deal (or lack of). And you keep referring back to the referendum result. But the referendum result says nothing about that subject. So why is it even relevant here?
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Hong Kong isn't the same as the Falklands or Gibraltar. Our sovereignty over the New Territories was based on a 99-year lease which ended in 1997. It was a legal document to which the UK agreed and we'd have been in very choppy waters if we had tried to go against it (the small matter of international law).
Now, Hong Kong Island itself and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity but it was decided by someone somewhere they didn't constitute a viable possession so it was agreed they would be passed over to China as well. Legally, we could have held on to the island and Kowloon but logistically it would have been very difficult.
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I agree with you that she's the frontrunner, and that she's a weak candidate for the ge. Where I think we disagree is I think she's a better candidate than Biden, and I also think she's still more likely to beat Trump than lose
Yeah, but Ohio is not the tipping swing state in the current climate. If a Democrat is winning Ohio they have probably already won enough Electoral College points to get the GE. Easier wins in Nev, Penn, Mich, Wisc, and even potentially Florida mean Ohio may not matter. Due to the nature of which states vote similarly, Ohio is not the tell tale swing state it may have been previously.
Also, I'm not really comfortable with your general spotlights on single polls, and personally prefer poll aggregates. The aggregate of all polls show all three of Biden, Sanders and Warren beating Trump in Ohio:
I think it fair to say that Mar/Apr/May GE has become more likely. Accordingly, Betfair`s 5.2 on Corbyn exit date being April - June looks tasty I`d say.
I`m on.
Great tip!
Although how long is the leadership campaign? He could announce his resignation in May following a GE but then be replaced in July in which case your bet loses.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50044659 The first figures have emerged demonstrating that Brexit uncertainty has adversely affected UK research. They show Britain's annual share of EU research funding has fallen by nearly a third since 2015. The analysis by the Royal Society suggests scientists are choosing not to work in Britain, with a 35% drop in those coming to the UK via EU schemes. Its president, Venki Ramakrishnan, said scientists did not want to "gamble with their careers" by working in the UK. He explained: "They have no sense of whether the UK will be willing and able to maintain its global scientific leadership. UK science has also missed out on around [£440m] a year because of the uncertainty around Brexit....
I'm nicely green on Mayor Pete but a word of caution - when I discussed this some time ago with an American friend of mine he had a) never heard of Mayor Pete; and b) said with some confidence that Warren would get the Dem nomination.
The big prices are all gone on Warren though !
Yes he told me this "categorically" when she was around 2.5 so even then the odds weren't attractive.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Hong Kong isn't the same as the Falklands or Gibraltar. Our sovereignty over the New Territories was based on a 99-year lease which ended in 1997. It was a legal document to which the UK agreed and we'd have been in very choppy waters if we had tried to go against it (the small matter of international law).
Now, Hong Kong Island itself and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity but it was decided by someone somewhere they didn't constitute a viable possession so it was agreed they would be passed over to China as well. Legally, we could have held on to the island and Kowloon but logistically it would have been very difficult.
Yes we were always going to hand them back but if you polled Hong Kong people now I suspect they would rather still be British than Chinese although probably now preferring independence for Hong Kong to both.
Indeed, handing over the Falklands to Argentina, Gibraltar to Spain and Northern Ireland to the Republic against the wishes of the population is not a good luck. Indeed as we now see handing over Hong Kong to China against the wishes of the locals has not turned out that great either (though realistically we could not hold off Beijing).
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Hong Kong isn't the same as the Falklands or Gibraltar. Our sovereignty over the New Territories was based on a 99-year lease which ended in 1997. It was a legal document to which the UK agreed and we'd have been in very choppy waters if we had tried to go against it (the small matter of international law).
Now, Hong Kong Island itself and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity but it was decided by someone somewhere they didn't constitute a viable possession so it was agreed they would be passed over to China as well. Legally, we could have held on to the island and Kowloon but logistically it would have been very difficult.
Logistically difficult???? You do realise we are able to blockade Spain if we wanted to so I can't see how a resupply of Kowloon/HK Island would pose too much of a problem.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50044659 The first figures have emerged demonstrating that Brexit uncertainty has adversely affected UK research. They show Britain's annual share of EU research funding has fallen by nearly a third since 2015. The analysis by the Royal Society suggests scientists are choosing not to work in Britain, with a 35% drop in those coming to the UK via EU schemes. Its president, Venki Ramakrishnan, said scientists did not want to "gamble with their careers" by working in the UK. He explained: "They have no sense of whether the UK will be willing and able to maintain its global scientific leadership. UK science has also missed out on around [£440m] a year because of the uncertainty around Brexit....
This is exactly what I was warning about a few weeks ago, and was met with stupid incredulity from a couple of the more cultlike Brexists on here. Turns out the effects are worse and sooner than I even guessed.
I think Warren is now the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination, with Buttigieg her closest rival in Iowa, Sanders in New Hampshire and Biden in South Carolina.
Buttigieg also scored some hits on Warren in the debate last night on how she will have to raise taxes for her proposed Medicare for all plan, something Sanders has admitted he will have to do but not yet her. If she did become nominee be assured the Trump campaign would also run ads hitting her on taxes
I agree with you that she's the frontrunner, and that she's a weak candidate for the ge. Where I think we disagree is I think she's a better candidate than Biden, and I also think she's still more likely to beat Trump than lose
Yeah, but Ohio is not the tipping swing state in the current climate. If a Democrat is winning Ohio they have probably already won enough Electoral College points to get the GE. Easier wins in Nev, Penn, Mich, Wisc, and even potentially Florida mean Ohio may not matter. Due to the nature of which states vote similarly, Ohio is not the tell tale swing state it may have been previously.
Also, I'm not really comfortable with your general spotlights on single polls, and personally prefer poll aggregates. The aggregate of all polls show all three of Biden, Sanders and Warren beating Trump in Ohio:
Fair points. And if someone then just responds by ignoring both points and just continuing to cite a single poll from Ohio, I think you have every reason not to bother continuing to bash your head against a brick wall.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50044659 The first figures have emerged demonstrating that Brexit uncertainty has adversely affected UK research. They show Britain's annual share of EU research funding has fallen by nearly a third since 2015. The analysis by the Royal Society suggests scientists are choosing not to work in Britain, with a 35% drop in those coming to the UK via EU schemes. Its president, Venki Ramakrishnan, said scientists did not want to "gamble with their careers" by working in the UK. He explained: "They have no sense of whether the UK will be willing and able to maintain its global scientific leadership. UK science has also missed out on around [£440m] a year because of the uncertainty around Brexit....
This is exactly what I was warning about a few weeks ago, and was met with stupid incredulity from a couple of the more cultlike Brexists on here. Turns out the effects are worse and sooner than I even guessed.
But as I pointed out, facts don't change opinions.
He is just finishing off the survey for CCHQ so Boris knows how much he can flog Northern Ireland for. You should always get a valuation done before selling property....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50044659 The first figures have emerged demonstrating that Brexit uncertainty has adversely affected UK research. They show Britain's annual share of EU research funding has fallen by nearly a third since 2015. The analysis by the Royal Society suggests scientists are choosing not to work in Britain, with a 35% drop in those coming to the UK via EU schemes. Its president, Venki Ramakrishnan, said scientists did not want to "gamble with their careers" by working in the UK. He explained: "They have no sense of whether the UK will be willing and able to maintain its global scientific leadership. UK science has also missed out on around [£440m] a year because of the uncertainty around Brexit....
This is exactly what I was warning about a few weeks ago, and was met with stupid incredulity from a couple of the more cultlike Brexists on here. Turns out the effects are worse and sooner than I even guessed.
But as I pointed out, facts don't change opinions.
You can't save someone from a cult, but you can put other people off joining.
He is just finishing off the survey for CCHQ so Boris knows how much he can flog Northern Ireland for. You should always get a valuation done before selling property....
On the contrary, he's contemplating our paying very large sums in order to partially give it away.
Yes, informative article. Underlines the fact that if anyone ever told Cameron anything about negotiating he wasn't listening.
No. He seemed to think that he could rely on Merkel - who grew up in the prison-country of East Germany, surrounded by impenetrable borders of walls, barbed wire and armed guards - to agree to restrictions on freedom of movement.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50044659 The first figures have emerged demonstrating that Brexit uncertainty has adversely affected UK research. They show Britain's annual share of EU research funding has fallen by nearly a third since 2015. The analysis by the Royal Society suggests scientists are choosing not to work in Britain, with a 35% drop in those coming to the UK via EU schemes. Its president, Venki Ramakrishnan, said scientists did not want to "gamble with their careers" by working in the UK. He explained: "They have no sense of whether the UK will be willing and able to maintain its global scientific leadership. UK science has also missed out on around [£440m] a year because of the uncertainty around Brexit....
This is exactly what I was warning about a few weeks ago, and was met with stupid incredulity from a couple of the more cultlike Brexists on here. Turns out the effects are worse and sooner than I even guessed.
UK government funding of science, engineering, and technology research has been going up steadily over the last few years. We may end up with fewer scientists from the EU coming here, but there's no real sign of any wider decline in the sector, quite the opposite in fact.
1) at what time is Barnier meeting today and when will their conclusions be made? 2) at what time will the House start sitting on Saturday and when will it end?
A most interesting place. Don't though take back the message to Boris that because, back in the age of legends, a couple of giants could build a link between Ireland and Scotland it's practicable to build a bridge today!
He is just finishing off the survey for CCHQ so Boris knows how much he can flog Northern Ireland for. You should always get a valuation done before selling property....
On the contrary, he's contemplating our paying very large sums in order to partially give it away.
So dom grieve is meeting the EU demanding a delay to brexit and makes a referendum a condition on any deal...who put him in charge if the UK negotiating position?
Is this any more idiotic/pointless than people like IDS (who wasn't in charge of the negotiations either) schlepping over to Brussels to meet Barnier and co or Owen Paterson trying to arrange trade deals with Oklahoma?
MarquesMarks said: "Our MPs should be made to do their jobs - and be the final arbiters on this deal, to implement Brexit as they promised their voters they would."
The trouble is that many of the MPs who voted Remain promised that they would honour the referendum result but didn`t really mean it. They were scared of their particular electorate rather than standing up for what they really thought. This wss always going to end badly.
I guess plenty of them meant it, but only with a deal that they could agree with. Labour should have whipped against triggering Article 50 without an agreed way forward. Conservative MPs who voted remain should have insisted on the Conservative 2015 manifesto pledge to maintain Britain's place in the Single Market would be honoured before triggering Article 50.
1) at what time is Barnier meeting today and when will their conclusions be made? 2) at what time will the House start sitting on Saturday and when will it end?
Comments
On the preferred outcome .
50% Leave (30% to leave with a deal , 20% no deal )
42% Remain
There is no mandate for no deal , end of story! The 30% includes Remainers like myself who can accept a deal but are totally against no deal .
That may not happen this time because everything is weird and also a wide field.
But if you are not in top 3 in Iowa you are certainly in the fight of your life from then on.
Assuming Warren and Biden walk a top 3, then that all in important last slot is the key.
Go Pete.
Now, I don't agree with him politically, but he, like many others, is being painted as a closet Remainer who has conspired to overthrow the pure and noble Will of the Peepul.
He has voted for Brexit at virtually every opportunity. The only thing he has v oted against - in the final push - is No Deal Brexit. He has voted for the WA on every possible occasion (far more so than Boris). He voted for the WA-plus-a-Customs-Union, for the WA-plus-Common-Market-2.0, for the WA-plus-a-referendum, for anything he could vote for to get a Brexit Deal through.
He wouldn't, though, stand for a No Deal Brexit, probably because he actually stopped and considered what that meant for everyone.
As I say, I don't agree with his politics on many other things, but I think it's criminally unfair to paint him - and many others - as "Remainers" when he's bent over backwards to try to get a Deal through.
But too many people have their simplistic, dishonest BETRAYAL narrative. It's easy, it "explains" things, it makes themselves the morally superior while their opponents are cads and traitors, and it avoids them having the cognitive workload of actually having to think. So there's no chance they'll change that, is there?
https://twitter.com/drjennings/status/1184376128091426816
They introduced triple lock pensions to benefit the oldies even more.
And tripled student tuition fees to make things worse at the other end.
Speaking of which did the QS mention student tuition fees at all ?
Given that the ONS is not including the student bad debt in the government borrowing figures there's a £10bn plus annual opportunity to reduce tuition fees.
Perhaps Javid is going to reveal something in his Budget or maybe it is being kept for the GE manifesto.
If not it means the Conservatives are even more incompetent and in denial than already suspected.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50043549
Indeed even in Scotland and Catalonia at least half the population do not want independence
Where's your ambition, man?
There's a good Finkelstein article in the Times this morning pointing out that people are far more amenable to accepting that they were wrong about particular facts than is often thought - but that acceptance doesn't change their beliefs, which the facts contradict, one iota.
Let's be honest, I'm sure someone will pop up to tell me I've got THAT wrong and if a political wonk doesn't understand the deal, the average punter on the street certainly isn't.
The average voter was told it (TM's deal) was a shit deal, because Labour said so, Lib Dems said so, the SNP said so, DUP said so and half the Tories said so. Therefore its a shit deal.
If this new improved sparkly deal has the DUP and all the Tories on board, then its clearly better because now only Lab, LD and SNP oppose.
Therefore its much better.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_ComRes/status/1184371637514395648?s=20
I think Boris may just have the numbers to squeeze through his deal, and suspect there are still not quite the numbers for a second ref. Could come down to 1 or 2 votes deciding it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalan_independence_movement#Polling_institutions
Most of the recent polls have shown more in favour of independence than against. One poll -- the most recent -- shows independence behind.
When we had the full British Empire and India we might have held off China (and it was a Labour government which gave India independence).
Now we can still hold off most nations but no longer the USA, China and probably not Russia either on our own
Ontario and Quebec alone have 199 of the 338 ridings so they are critical. The Liberal majority in 2015 was built on taking 96 seats from the Conservatives and doing very well in areas like Toronto and Winnipeg and wiping out the Conservatives in the east. It's hard to know how this will go with some Greens polling strongly and the PPC challenging sitting Conservatives in some seats.
I just don't see the GOP, who have previously run on gutting all social safety nets, and Trump, who has in the past said he is happy with single payer, will be trusted messengers on healthcare.
I think Warren could win a GE on Medicare for all. Would it pass a Dem controlled Congress, on the other hand, I don't know.
Given the circs an' all, might be important to know. What's your feeling?
Which would make it relatively simple to get through Congress.
https://www.cleveland.com/politics/2019/10/ohio-poll-shows-donald-trump-behind-joe-biden-bernie-sanders-and-elizabeth-warren-in-possible-2020-matchups.html
It is a wedge issue Trump could exploit especially as it is the Electoral College not the popular vote that wins the presidency
The only way he can 'win' is by having the EU NOT offer a Deal.
If a new deal is agreed today, and if it looks likely that deal will pass the HoC (forget whats in it, that really doesn't matter) then both Remain and Farage's Brexit party lose today. Probably forever.
This is it for Grieve. His only hope is that the EU add a late condition, like slaughter of all first born British citizens, because he's about to be totally and utterly fucked. And he knows it.
I`m on.
So the Conservatives winning the popular vote but the Liberals narrowly winning most seats looks possible.
http://338canada.com
Mayor Pete is definitely the cutest candidate in a long time!
I'm nicely green on Mayor Pete but a word of caution - when I discussed this some time ago with an American friend of mine he had a) never heard of Mayor Pete; and b) said with some confidence that Warren would get the Dem nomination.
Also, I'm not really comfortable with your general spotlights on single polls, and personally prefer poll aggregates. The aggregate of all polls show all three of Biden, Sanders and Warren beating Trump in Ohio:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Ohio.html
France to be fair still has a half decent military it invests in and is the only EU nation with nuclear weapons like us
Now, Hong Kong Island itself and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity but it was decided by someone somewhere they didn't constitute a viable possession so it was agreed they would be passed over to China as well. Legally, we could have held on to the island and Kowloon but logistically it would have been very difficult.
Although how long is the leadership campaign? He could announce his resignation in May following a GE but then be replaced in July in which case your bet loses.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50044659
The first figures have emerged demonstrating that Brexit uncertainty has adversely affected UK research.
They show Britain's annual share of EU research funding has fallen by nearly a third since 2015.
The analysis by the Royal Society suggests scientists are choosing not to work in Britain, with a 35% drop in those coming to the UK via EU schemes.
Its president, Venki Ramakrishnan, said scientists did not want to "gamble with their careers" by working in the UK.
He explained: "They have no sense of whether the UK will be willing and able to maintain its global scientific leadership. UK science has also missed out on around [£440m] a year because of the uncertainty around Brexit....
Turns out the effects are worse and sooner than I even guessed.
1) at what time is Barnier meeting today and when will their conclusions be made?
2) at what time will the House start sitting on Saturday and when will it end?
Is this any more idiotic/pointless than people like IDS (who wasn't in charge of the negotiations either) schlepping over to Brussels to meet Barnier and co or Owen Paterson trying to arrange trade deals with Oklahoma?
I won't be as flippant as to say then head down the A1 to see the other end of the Province.
Thanking you all in advance.