We on here might know that Get Brexit Done is designed to appeal to those who want out of the EU, and/or who don't want a further three months spent on a trade deal negotiation and then a second EU referendum six months after that.
All many people hear is "Conservatives banging on about Brexit while Lab is promising us free stuff".
The Tories will have focus grouped their message. They have stayed on it and it hasn't become a joke like "Strong and Stable" did. I think that is an indicator that they will do better than 2017, also helped by the patent nonsense of the Corbyn giveaways.
None of the Tory leaflets I've seen this week mention Brexit - it's vote Tory for a majority Government to get things done.
While I realise there won't be another election for while, I do wonder what will happen to a Tory Government when the public realises that Brexit isn't actually done on 31st January, and EU rules will still apply. Further, there will be major rows over various things between then and mid-summer, when the basis will have to be agreed. I realise Boris has the chutzpah to ignore any problems but he won't be able to do so if something goes seriously and publicly wrong...... inability, perhaps, to get a terrorist back. So far as I'm aware, so far in life he's always been able to get away with whatever by relying on his friends to stump up the money, sweeping whatever it is under the carpet or just walking away and forgetting about it. However, those methods are going to run out one day. As they did with Cameron.
If Boris achieves a good majority the narrative changes, second referendums and revoke disappear as a new government is formed
I believe Boris will be pragmatic and will achieve a compromise but of course predicting how it pans out is impossible at present. The labour party would have serious issues if a good majority comes about and Jo Swinson, if she retains her seat, will also come under pressure
Most remainers prophecy doom and gloom but as Boris said today 150 billion of inward investment will follow next year and we may well do very well. I am on the fence on the economic outlook but in the end the vote of the people will have been respected, for good or bad
Speaking of slimy Chucka - on an entirely unrelated tangent - how long do we expect Swinson to last as LD leader after the election?
It depends how she does is the most obvious answer. The trouble is the Euros and the locals flattered to deceive and set up some unrealistic expectations for the general. If she can equal the headcount at the dissolution, and is able to show a menu of good second places from the results next Thursday, she should at least be able to work out her probation as a new leader.
She seems to irritate many people, but although I have never voted LibDem, I like her.
It also depends how Brexit goes. If it turns out to be the never-ending clusterfuck that many are predicting, she will gain some kudos as the party leader who tried hardest to stop it happening.
We on here might know that Get Brexit Done is designed to appeal to those who want out of the EU, and/or who don't want a further three months spent on a trade deal negotiation and then a second EU referendum six months after that.
All many people hear is "Conservatives banging on about Brexit while Lab is promising us free stuff".
The Tories will have focus grouped their message. They have stayed on it and it hasn't become a joke like "Strong and Stable" did. I think that is an indicator that they will do better than 2017, also helped by the patent nonsense of the Corbyn giveaways.
None of the Tory leaflets I've seen this week mention Brexit - it's vote Tory for a majority Government to get things done.
While I realise there won't be another election for while, I do wonder what will happen to a Tory Government when the public realises that Brexit isn't actually done on 31st January, and EU rules will still apply. Further, there will be major rows over various things between then and mid-summer, when the basis will have to be agreed. I realise Boris has the chutzpah to ignore any problems but he won't be able to do so if something goes seriously and publicly wrong...... inability, perhaps, to get a terrorist back. So far as I'm aware, so far in life he's always been able to get away with whatever by relying on his friends to stump up the money, sweeping whatever it is under the carpet or just walking away and forgetting about it. However, those methods are going to run out one day. As they did with Cameron.
I actually think it will be the opposite - in the near future Turkey is going to send us a plane full of ISIS fighters with British passports. Were it not for the election I suspect it would have been this week,
Reasonable supposition I suspect. Will the result of the election make any difference to that though?
I shared this piece earlier today to deafening silence. Hopefully someone might read it this time. I differ from you in thinking that we will likely get Thatcherism on steroids, for a few reasons. (1) they keep referring to themselves as "one nation" which is a clear sign they don't expect that impression to take hold as a result of their actions; (2) most genuinely "one nation" Tories have been purged while arch-Thatcherites have been promoted; (3) the donor class who promoted Johnson and hard Brexit all the way through May's tenure and are also active in dark money Thatcherite think tanks want a return on their investment; (4) Johnson himself has no philosophy but is instinctively neoliberal on economic issues and his advisors eg Cummings share that view; (5) every Tory leader from Major on has come to power by offering a more anti-EU platform than their predecessor, and so the idea that Johnson will pivot to BINO is for the birds - he'd face immediate challenge from the right of the party - and once you accept dis-alignment from the EU and the loss of market access then you have to embrace economic shock therapy to prevent capital flight.
Convincing. The reason I'm inclined to think not is that the front man - Johnson - has a craving to be popular and such a rightwards lurch economically will be a hard sell to the electorate. Even if sugar coated with some populist stuff on law & order, the military, immigration, social and culture issues, my money would be on a big defeat next time if he follows this path.
I will perhaps surprise people by saying that my hunch is to disagree. We will get a Soft Brexit FTA (Transition extended first) and the "Boris" government will be relatively innocuous. The worst thing about it will be that we will get used to having a risible clown as our PM and our standards will thus have been lowered.
I shared this piece earlier today to deafening silence. Hopefully someone might read it this time. I differ from you in thinking that we will likely get Thatcherism on steroids, for a few reasons. (1) they keep referring to themselves as "one nation" which is a clear sign they don't expect that impression to take hold as a result of their actions; (2) most genuinely "one nation" Tories have been purged while arch-Thatcherites have been promoted; (3) the donor class who promoted Johnson and hard Brexit all the way through May's tenure and are also active in dark money Thatcherite think tanks want a return on their investment; (4) Johnson himself has no philosophy but is instinctively neoliberal on economic issues and his advisors eg Cummings share that view; (5) every Tory leader from Major on has come to power by offering a more anti-EU platform than their predecessor, and so the idea that Johnson will pivot to BINO is for the birds - he'd face immediate challenge from the right of the party - and once you accept dis-alignment from the EU and the loss of market access then you have to embrace economic shock therapy to prevent capital flight.
Absolutely I think Boris is instinctively neoliberal as any good Tory should be. Its why I backed him and why I think he'll be a good PM.
You say it as if neoliberalism is a dangerous or extreme idea. Neoliberalism is a classic, sensible way to run the country.
Speaking of slimy Chucka - on an entirely unrelated tangent - how long do we expect Swinson to last as LD leader after the election?
It depends how she does is the most obvious answer. The trouble is the Euros and the locals flattered to deceive and set up some unrealistic expectations for the general. If she can equal the headcount at the dissolution, and is able to show a menu of good second places from the results next Thursday, she should at least be able to work out her probation as a new leader.
She seems to irritate many people, but although I have never voted LibDem, I like her.
After the election she'll have time to consult a voice coach, as did Thatcher. IIRC she was regarded as 'shrill' at first.
Stupid clueless betting question... I'm trying to understanding betting odds on the Betfair exchange.
If there is an amount of £1402 under 1.41 in the leftmost Lay column (with 1.40 in the rightmost Back column), is this £1402 caused by backers saying they will back the event happening but only at odds of 1.41 (rather than the 1.40 available)?
If so, if someone were to lay £1403 at 1.41, then the 1.41 would move into the rightmost back column and 1.42 would move to the left?
Correct (except that I think the minimum bet is £2 so for the unmatched part of the bet to show up the punter in your last paragraph would need to try to lay £1404, £1402 of which would be used to match the existing offer which would therefore disappear from the display, and £2 would be available for someone else to back at 1.41, so it would be shown in the rightmost Back column).
Stupid clueless betting question... I'm trying to understanding betting odds on the Betfair exchange.
If there is an amount of £1402 under 1.41 in the leftmost Lay column (with 1.40 in the rightmost Back column), is this £1402 caused by backers saying they will back the event happening but only at odds of 1.41 (rather than the 1.40 available)?
If so, if someone were to lay £1403 at 1.41, then the 1.41 would move into the rightmost back column and 1.42 would move to the left?
Yes to the 1st question but not quite for the 2nd. If the whole of the amount at 1.41 were taken the market would then be 1.40 blue versus 1.42 pink. You will then probably get done for either back or lay if you go in and offer/bid 1.41.
Latest 12z GFS has put widespread travel disruption firmly back on the charts for Weds-Thurs.
Just saying.
For northern Scotland only on thursday, maybe some sleet later in the day further south (there is no snow showing on wednesday), the east coast may see some snow friday.
Everton's manager in discussions with the owners at this moment
Will he survive ?
He should, best man for the job.
Plus Everton fans should be reminded that they got Sam Allardyce sacked for only finishing eighth.
Surely it is coming up to that time of year where Big Sam gets a job to save a club down the bottom....announced in time for a new transfer window, where he can buy 27 new players with dodgy agents.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Latest 12z GFS has put widespread travel disruption firmly back on the charts for Weds-Thurs.
Just saying.
You do seem to have a thing about voter weather disruption but unless we have a blizzard I doubt it will have much effect. However, I would agree with you when you suggested it could harm labour as many elderly who usual vote conservative will have sent in their postal votes
Everton's manager in discussions with the owners at this moment
Will he survive ?
He should, best man for the job.
Plus Everton fans should be reminded that they got Sam Allardyce sacked for only finishing eighth.
Surely it is coming up to that time of year where Big Sam gets a job to save a club down the bottom....announced in time for a new transfer window, where he can buy 27 new players with dodgy agents.
Have a bit more respect for Sam, he had a 100% record with England which was cruelly cut short by... oh I see your point.
Stupid clueless betting question... I'm trying to understanding betting odds on the Betfair exchange.
If there is an amount of £1402 under 1.41 in the leftmost Lay column (with 1.40 in the rightmost Back column), is this £1402 caused by backers saying they will back the event happening but only at odds of 1.41 (rather than the 1.40 available)?
If so, if someone were to lay £1403 at 1.41, then the 1.41 would move into the rightmost back column and 1.42 would move to the left?
Yes to the 1st question but not quite for the 2nd. If the whole of the amount at 1.41 were taken the market would then be 1.40 blue versus 1.42 pink. You will then probably get done for either back or lay if you go in and offer/bid 1.41.
Everton's manager in discussions with the owners at this moment
Will he survive ?
He should, best man for the job.
Plus Everton fans should be reminded that they got Sam Allardyce sacked for only finishing eighth.
Lifelong Evertonian here. Was nothing to do with the position, and everything to do with the dire football, and the way he took a % approach and just wrote off the vast majority of away games to focus on the handful of home fixtures he deemed winnable.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
Prince Andrew says he was physically incapable of sweating.
You know what else is physically incapable of sweating?
Lizards.
I remember reading David Icke's website back in the early 2000s, and it mentioned some utterly bizarre remarks George W. Bush had apparently made about 9/11 at a Q&A session. I initially thought it was just a fib, but then it linked to a transcript of the Q&A session on the White House's website! But I've never been able to find any trace of it again on Icke's site or anywhere else. Maybe the White House's website had been hacked or something. Very strange.
Everton's manager in discussions with the owners at this moment
Will he survive ?
He should, best man for the job.
Plus Everton fans should be reminded that they got Sam Allardyce sacked for only finishing eighth.
Lifelong Evertonian here. Was nothing to do with the position, and everything to do with the dire football, and the way he took a % approach and just wrote off the vast majority of away games to focus on the handful of home fixtures he deemed winnable.
That’s what you have to do when you’re in a relegation battle.
Chuka's team have certainly been trying very hard in Cities of London and Westminster, carpet-bombing innocent residents with dodgy bar-charts and fake newspapers. Amusingly Labour are also running bar-charts, based on the 2017 results, to make out that only Labour can beat the Tories here.
This is undoubtedly a good constituency for Chuka to try for, and I'm pretty sure that the LibDem blitz will take him past Labour. However, I think it will only take him into a respectable second place, not a win, not least because the Tory candidate seems sensible and is well-established locally (she's the leader of Westminster council).
I think it will be a great pity if Chuka does fail here; for all his mistakes, he's a sensible and articulate figure with more talent than most MPs, and the LibDems need all the talent they can get. I also think he deserves great credit, whether you agree with him or not, for calling out Corbyn and for putting his own career on the line. But more likely heroic failure than shock success.
Yep - the only place he was likely to be able to parachute into and win was Sheffield Hallam but even then I'm not sure a Londoner would work there.
He should have stood in Streatham doing the honourable thing.
At least since he did the 'chicken run' he isn't eligible for the 'parachute payment' many thousands of pounds that defeated MPs normally get. As the 'funny tinge' Tigger was horrified to find out.
Ooh, didn’t know that, I thought they just have to be defeated by the public, rather than specifically in the same constituency. For anyone who’s served since around 2010, it’s three months’ salary, so around £20k, tax free.
I will perhaps surprise people by saying that my hunch is to disagree. We will get a Soft Brexit FTA (Transition extended first) and the "Boris" government will be relatively innocuous. The worst thing about it will be that we will get used to having a risible clown as our PM and our standards will thus have been lowered.
I shared this piece earlier today to deafening silence. Hopefully someone might read it this time. I differ from you in thinking that we will likely get Thatcherism on steroids, for a few reasons. (1) they keep referring to themselves as "one nation" which is a clear sign they don't expect that impression to take hold as a result of their actions; (2) most genuinely "one nation" Tories have been purged while arch-Thatcherites have been promoted; (3) the donor class who promoted Johnson and hard Brexit all the way through May's tenure and are also active in dark money Thatcherite think tanks want a return on their investment; (4) Johnson himself has no philosophy but is instinctively neoliberal on economic issues and his advisors eg Cummings share that view; (5) every Tory leader from Major on has come to power by offering a more anti-EU platform than their predecessor, and so the idea that Johnson will pivot to BINO is for the birds - he'd face immediate challenge from the right of the party - and once you accept dis-alignment from the EU and the loss of market access then you have to embrace economic shock therapy to prevent capital flight.
Absolutely I think Boris is instinctively neoliberal as any good Tory should be. Its why I backed him and why I think he'll be a good PM.
You say it as if neoliberalism is a dangerous or extreme idea. Neoliberalism is a classic, sensible way to run the country.
If the votes are there, he'll be neoliberal alright. Do you think they are though?
He currently has the support of the DM, Express and the Borisograph. Nobody ever mistook these for neoliberal. Nor is there anything neoliberal about Brexit.
Looks to me like a very right wing conservative government coming up, and he'll play along, I think, if it keeps him in office.
Everton's manager in discussions with the owners at this moment
Will he survive ?
If he does or doesn't I can't see them avoiding dropping more points this month. Tough run of fixtures for the Toffees at the minute: Liverpool, Chelsea, Man Utd then Arsenal then back to Liverpool for the FA Cup. Ouch!
Meanwhile the reds keep marching on just to add insult to injury for the blues.
OJ, who was I think 13 when Blair became PM, has never lived as an adult under anything other than a centrist regime, would never as a matter of a priori ideology think that a Tory government could be good, would do well to reflect that a Labour party led from the centre would win this election at a canter, and that the extremists in this campaign are his socialist friends.
I think it's rubbish that a centrist Labour would walk this election. This is Leave vs Remain through the prism of FPTP in a country where a landslide majority of seats are Leave seats. On top of that the Leave vote is consolidated far better than the Remain vote due to Johnson sidelining Farage. The election is timed and framed perfectly for the Cons. "Get Brexit Done" wins this regardless of the opposition.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel hearsay" is just bullshit talking points. Sondland himself, who was the one directly involved, has stated outright that Donald Trump personally directed him to give an explicit quid pro quo to Ukraine: announce an investigation into the Bidens to get military aid and be able to meet with POTUS. The aid was indeed held up (until the White House found out about the whistle blower) and the call transcript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
One of the particularly disappointing aspects of remainers not accepting a democratic decision is how many of our limited pool of talent have thrown away their careers on this. I think Chuka has more to add than most of our MPs as of course did Rory Stewart and even Dominic Grieve and Letwin.
Three years ago this week, the politician campaigning for revoke was saying this... and it wasn't because he thought we should revoke!
"Chuka Umunna today urged Remain campaigners to abandon calls for a second referendum or risk being seen as a metropolitan elite “who think they know best”.
In an interview with the Evening Standard, the influential Labour backbencher urged fellow pro-EU campaigners to show more respect for the 17 million who voted for Brexit
“Remain didn’t lose by a landslide but was clearly defeated at the ballot box on June 23,” he said.
“I think it’s really important we listen and more deeply understand why people took a different view to us.”
He added: “The 52 per cent are no more a bunch of racists and bigots than the 48 per cent are a well-heeled metropolitan elite. I have no time for either characterisation.”
“I really have no time for calls for a second referendum because I think it comes across as disrespectful to those who voted to leave,” he said.
“Those calls reinforce what I feel is a false stereotype — of a bunch of people in London who think they know best.”
He went on: “We are going to leave — it hurts me to say that — but we have got to move forward and work out how to get the best possible deal.”
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
OJ, who was I think 13 when Blair became PM, has never lived as an adult under anything other than a centrist regime, would never as a matter of a priori ideology think that a Tory government could be good, would do well to reflect that a Labour party led from the centre would win this election at a canter, and that the extremists in this campaign are his socialist friends.
I think it's rubbish that a centrist Labour would walk this election. This is Leave vs Remain through the prism of FPTP in a country where a landslide majority of seats are Leave seats. On top of that the Leave vote is consolidated far more than the Remain vote due to Johnson sidelining Farage. The election is timed and framed perfectly for the Cons. "Get Brexit Done" wins this regardless of the opposition.
With a centrist Labour I would probably not be voting for my idiot of an MP. I might not go as far a voting Labour, but I would be able to vote Lib Dem with a clear conscience.
I shared this piece earlier today to deafening silence. Hopefully someone might read it this time. I differ from you in thinking that we will likely get Thatcherism on steroids, for a few reasons. (1) they keep referring to themselves as "one nation" which is a clear sign they don't expect that impression to take hold as a result of their actions; (2) most genuinely "one nation" Tories have been purged while arch-Thatcherites have been promoted; (3) the donor class who promoted Johnson and hard Brexit all the way through May's tenure and are also active in dark money Thatcherite think tanks want a return on their investment; (4) Johnson himself has no philosophy but is instinctively neoliberal on economic issues and his advisors eg Cummings share that view; (5) every Tory leader from Major on has come to power by offering a more anti-EU platform than their predecessor, and so the idea that Johnson will pivot to BINO is for the birds - he'd face immediate challenge from the right of the party - and once you accept dis-alignment from the EU and the loss of market access then you have to embrace economic shock therapy to prevent capital flight.
Absolutely I think Boris is instinctively neoliberal as any good Tory should be. Its why I backed him and why I think he'll be a good PM.
You say it as if neoliberalism is a dangerous or extreme idea. Neoliberalism is a classic, sensible way to run the country.
If the votes are there, he'll be neoliberal alright. Do you think they are though?
He currently has the support of the DM, Express and the Borisograph. Nobody ever mistook these for neoliberal. Nor is there anything neoliberal about Brexit.
Looks to me like a very right wing conservative government coming up, and he'll play along, I think, if it keeps him in office.
We'll see. The arguments he made during the referendum campaign were neoliberal ones, as were those made by other Tories like Gove and Hannan.
I hope the Tories win a healthy majority which will give him the breathing space to run a decent neoliberal government and not run every policy through all the extremes within the party. There are risks to healthy majorities but the last few years have shown the dangers of minority or small majority governments too.
We on here might know that Get Brexit Done is designed to appeal to those who want out of the EU, and/or who don't want a further three months spent on a trade deal negotiation and then a second EU referendum six months after that.
All many people hear is "Conservatives banging on about Brexit while Lab is promising us free stuff".
The Tories will have focus grouped their message. They have stayed on it and it hasn't become a joke like "Strong and Stable" did. I think that is an indicator that they will do better than 2017, also helped by the patent nonsense of the Corbyn giveaways.
None of the Tory leaflets I've seen this week mention Brexit - it's vote Tory for a majority Government to get things done.
While I realise there won't be another election for while, I do wonder what will happen to a Tory Government when the public realises that Brexit isn't actually done on 31st January, and EU rules will still apply.
Nothing at all. Everyone knows we have a transition period. But we will officially be out of the EU on that date even if some rules still apply. That will satisfy the vast majority of those who voted Leave.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Mueller lays clear cut evidence of 10 obstruction of justice instances.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
One wonders what evidence you would need in order to convict your man?
Latest 12z GFS has put widespread travel disruption firmly back on the charts for Weds-Thurs.
Just saying.
You do seem to have a thing about voter weather disruption but unless we have a blizzard I doubt it will have much effect. However, I would agree with you when you suggested it could harm labour as many elderly who usual vote conservative will have sent in their postal votes
Having had a closer look, what this particular model run shows is some good snow for northern Scotland from late tuesday on, but nothing unusual for a scottish winter. Maybe little snow over the pennines and high ground of the north late Wednesday clearing by Thursday morning, further snow for northern Scotland and possibly over the southern hills of England, the moors etc round teatime thursday and a shed load off the east coast on friday (as is often the case in a northerly) No disruption. No obstruction, no collusion!
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Boris will agree a deal by end of year and then extend the transition for ratification. Eurosceptics will be furious. Four years later they won't care.
Chuka's team have certainly been trying very hard in Cities of London and Westminster, carpet-bombing innocent residents with dodgy bar-charts and fake newspapers. Amusingly Labour are also running bar-charts, based on the 2017 results, to make out that only Labour can beat the Tories here.
This is undoubtedly a good constituency for Chuka to try for, and I'm pretty sure that the LibDem blitz will take him past Labour. However, I think it will only take him into a respectable second place, not a win, not least because the Tory candidate seems sensible and is well-established locally (she's the leader of Westminster council).
I think it will be a great pity if Chuka does fail here; for all his mistakes, he's a sensible and articulate figure with more talent than most MPs, and the LibDems need all the talent they can get. I also think he deserves great credit, whether you agree with him or not, for calling out Corbyn and for putting his own career on the line. But more likely heroic failure than shock success.
Yep - the only place he was likely to be able to parachute into and win was Sheffield Hallam but even then I'm not sure a Londoner would work there.
He should have stood in Streatham doing the honourable thing.
At least since he did the 'chicken run' he isn't eligible for the 'parachute payment' many thousands of pounds that defeated MPs normally get. As the 'funny tinge' Tigger was horrified to find out.
Ooh, didn’t know that, I thought they just have to be defeated by the public, rather than specifically in the same constituency. For anyone who’s served since around 2010, it’s three months’ salary, so around £20k, tax free.
I just remember Miss 'funny tinge' claiming it was very unfair and terrifying and tha she was very upset to realise that because she'd changed seats she lost the parachute payment. She said she was being "discriminated against": https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/angela-smith-exit-payment
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Mueller lays clear cut evidence of 13 obstruction of justice instances.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
One wonders what evidence you would need in order to convict your man?
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Mueller lays clear cut evidence of 13 obstruction of justice instances.
OJ, who was I think 13 when Blair became PM, has never lived as an adult under anything other than a centrist regime, would never as a matter of a priori ideology think that a Tory government could be good, would do well to reflect that a Labour party led from the centre would win this election at a canter, and that the extremists in this campaign are his socialist friends.
I think it's rubbish that a centrist Labour would walk this election. This is Leave vs Remain through the prism of FPTP in a country where a landslide majority of seats are Leave seats. On top of that the Leave vote is consolidated far better than the Remain vote due to Johnson sidelining Farage. The election is timed and framed perfectly for the Cons. "Get Brexit Done" wins this regardless of the opposition.
There's polling evidence that Labour would not be doing better under a variety of alternative leaders, though it doesn't go as far as to hypothesise some completely different programme.
I think you're right, and the reason we're having this election rather than putting Brexit through on the basis of the majority that Johnson finally assembled is that the Conservatives felt it was a good moment, and they may well be right. Or not. We'll soon know...
Boris will agree a deal by end of year and then extend the transition for ratification. Eurosceptics will be furious. Four years later they won't care.
Possibly, although I'm not sure the ERG nutters will be quite as docile as you say. In any case a vote for Boris is extremely dangerous because you can't rule out the faint possibility that for once in his life he might mean what he says.
Everton's manager in discussions with the owners at this moment
Will he survive ?
He should, best man for the job.
Plus Everton fans should be reminded that they got Sam Allardyce sacked for only finishing eighth.
Surely it is coming up to that time of year where Big Sam gets a job to save a club down the bottom....announced in time for a new transfer window, where he can buy 27 new players with dodgy agents.
Have a bit more respect for Sam, he had a 100% record with England which was cruelly cut short by... oh I see your point.
I just found the BBC Panorama from back in the day on YouTube...I wonder how much has changed in the past 10 years.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Poor Gibraltar will be thrown under the same bus as Norn Iron.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel hearsay" is just bullshit talking points. Sondland himself, who was the one directly involved, has stated outright that Donald Trump personally directed him to give an explicit quid pro quo to Ukraine: announce an investigation into the Bidens to get military aid and be able to meet with POTUS. The aid was indeed held up (until the White House found out about the whistle blower) and the call transcript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
And for the first time ever not a single member of the president's party will vote to impeach or convict.
And of course Ukraine has expressly denied any coercion or quid pro quo, but what would they know?
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Poor Gibraltar will be thrown under the same bus as Norn Iron.
That would only buy Spain. 26 other bribes would be needed.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
A Tory leader who just won a majority and a fourth consecutive term can move mountains within the party. Victory excuses all faults, defeat erases all virtues: see a certain T. May.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel hearsay" is just bullshit talking points. Sondland himself, who was the one directly involved, has stated outright that Donald Trump personally directed him to give an explicit quid pro quo to Ukraine: announce an investigation into the Bidens to get military aid and be able to meet with POTUS. The aid was indeed held up (until the White House found out about the whistle blower) and the call transcript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
And for the first time ever not a single member of the president's party will vote to impeach or convict.
Which speaks to how partisan politics has become and not the Presidents guilt or innocence.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel hearsay" is just bullshit talking points. Sondland himself, who was the one directly involved, has stated outright that Donald Trump personally directed him to give an explicit quid pro quo to Ukraine: announce an investigation into the Bidens to get military aid and be able to meet with POTUS. The aid was indeed held up (until the White House found out about the whistle blower) and the call transcript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
And for the first time ever not a single member of the president's party will vote to impeach or convict.
Because the Republican Party has become a cult, abandoning all previous principles on constitutionalism, family values, free markets, the Western alliance and the like. Dissenters have been purged out the party.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Poor Gibraltar will be thrown under the same bus as Norn Iron.
That would only buy Spain. 26 other bribes would be needed.
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evidence' of anything, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel hearsay" is just bullshit talking points. Sondland himself, who was the one directly involved, has stated outright that Donald Trump personally directed him to give an explicit quid pro quo to Ukraine: announce an investigation into the Bidens to get military aid and be able to meet with POTUS. The aid was indeed held up (until the White House found out about the whistle blower) and the call transcript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
And for the first time ever not a single member of the president's party will vote to impeach or convict.
Which speaks to how partisan politics has become and not the Presidents guilt or innocence.
Precisely. The impeachment itself is just a partisan tactic by the dems. The Republicans counter by saying nah, don't think so
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evi, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel hearsay" is just bullshit talking points. Sondland himself, who was the one directly involved, has stated outright that Donald Trump personally directed him to give an explicit quid pro quo to Ukraine: announce an investigation into the Bidens to get military aid and be able to meet with POTUS. The aid was indeed held up (until the White House found out about the whistle blower) and the call transcript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
And for the first time ever not a single member of the president's party will vote to impeach or convict.
Because the Republican Party has become a cult, abandoning all previous principles on constitutionalism, family values, free markets, the Western alliance and the like. Dissenters have been purged out the party.
Hmmmm I think you'll find most of the senators and reps were there long before Trump
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
It is always nice to see the Economist agreeing with what I said a couple of weeks ago (and was poo-poo-ed for by the PB Tories)
A vote for Johnson is a vote for No Deal because the deadlines are impossible to meet.
We on here might know that Get Brexit Done is designed to appeal to those who want out of the EU, and/or who don't want a further three months spent on a trade deal negotiation and then a second EU referendum six months after that.
All many people hear is "Conservatives banging on about Brexit while Lab is promising us free stuff".
The Tories will have focus grouped their message. They have stayed on it and it hasn't become a joke like "Strong and Stable" did. I think that is an indicator that they will do better than 2017, also helped by the patent nonsense of the Corbyn giveaways.
None of the Tory leaflets I've seen this week mention Brexit - it's vote Tory for a majority Government to get things done.
While I realise there won't be another election for while, I do wonder what will happen to a Tory Government when the public realises that Brexit isn't actually done on 31st January, and EU rules will still apply.
Nothing at all. Everyone knows we have a transition period. But we will officially be out of the EU on that date even if some rules still apply. That will satisfy the vast majority of those who voted Leave.
What will actually happen is that everyone (and this applies to Remainers as well as Leavers) will slowly start to realise that being out of the EU feels astonishingly similar to being in it. At least on an individual basis, most of the time.
The sooner that process starts, the better. Because then they can start forgetting about why it ever mattered.
Precisely. The impeachment itself is just a partisan tactic by the dems. The Republicans counter by saying nah, don't think so
What nonsense. The President abused US foreign policy to blackmail a foreign ally, currently under attack by a hostile power, with critical military aid for political favors for his re-election. It could be a textbook example for what impachment was designed for.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Boris will agree a deal by end of year and then extend the transition for ratification. Eurosceptics will be furious. Four years later they won't care.
I don't actually mind if he takes longer to get a trade deal, the main thing for a lot of leave voters like myself will be that Brexit is happening, it won't be blocked by parliament and a 2nd referendum will be stone dead. Throughout 2019 Brexit was very much in limbo and I would not have minded a delay if it was a government decision in our national interest rather than a deliberate attempt to thwart the democratic process.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
It is always nice to see the Economist agreeing with what I said a couple of weeks ago (and was poo-poo-ed for by the PB Tories)
A vote for Johnson is a vote for No Deal because the deadlines are impossible to meet.
The Economist used to be good but it is barely better than the Pink 'Un on Brexit. I'd still poo-poo it.
You cannot be taken seriously on this, I'm afraid. The bias is too strong.
But you can when it comes to predictions. So, say the big man gets acquitted but dropped by the Republicans - I know I know, but just say that he does - does he run as an independent?
I see the Trump Impeachment market has taken a sharp turn in favour 'Yes' - now trading at 1.08. Maybe Macron and his mates who were laughing at him yesterday knew something we didn't.
Well pelosi has announced they are proceeding so it ought to be 1.02 as the democrats will pass it. However he will easily win the senate trial and the whole thing will have been a giant waste of time.
Not necessarily.
It was never going to get through on a partisan basis but the evidence has now been presented and is now out there in the court of public opinion.
And from the republucans POV they can say the Democrats wasted 4 years on nothing rather than the things that matter in the States. It will just further polarize matters. And, as per Mueller, there is no real 'evi, just hearsay, second hand opinion and Adam Schiffs made up transcript. Its thin gruel.
Well yes, they can say that water isn't wet too. That's pretty much what the strategy has been so far. .
Trump's opposition not looking too hot at the moment - I've placed a fiver on Steyer btw @ around 450-1, he's qualified for the latest debate and is actually contesting Iowa, New Hampshire etc.
The idea that its "thin cruel cript documents the threat. Subsequently the White House has refused to provide subpoenaed documents and banned subpoenaed witnesses, proving obstruction of justice. It is the most open and shut case for impeachment in US history.
And for the first time ever not a single member of the president's party will vote to impeach or convict.
Because the Republican Party has become a cult, abandoning all previous principles on constitutionalism, family values, free markets, the Western alliance and the like. Dissenters have been purged out the party.
Hmmmm I think you'll find most of the senators and reps were there long before Trump
And they have all been cowed into submission by the rabid conservative media and Trump base. The fact most Republicans think Trump is a better president than Abraham Lincoln shows how mental they are.
I will perhaps surprise people by saying that my hunch is to disagree. We will get a Soft Brexit FTA (Transition extended first) and the "Boris" government will be relatively innocuous. The worst thing about it will be that we will get used to having a risible clown as our PM and our standards will thus have been lowered.
I shared this piece earlier today to deafening silence. Hopefully someone might read it this time. I differ from you in thinking that we will likely get Thatcherism on steroids, for a few reasons. (1) they keep referring to themselves as "one nation" which is a clear sign they don't expect that impression to take hold as a result of their actions; (2) most genuinely "one nation" Tories have been purged while arch-Thatcherites have been promoted; (3) the donor class who promoted Johnson and hard Brexit all the way through May's tenure and are also active in dark money Thatcherite think tanks want a return on their investment; (4) Johnson himself has no philosophy but is instinctively neoliberal on economic issues and his advisors eg Cummings share that view; (5) every Tory leader from Major on has come to power by offering a more anti-EU platform than their predecessor, and so the idea that Johnson will pivot to BINO is for the birds - he'd face immediate challenge from the right of the party - and once you accept dis-alignment from the EU and the loss of market access then you have to embrace economic shock therapy to prevent capital flight.
Absolutely I think Boris is instinctively neoliberal as any good Tory should be. Its why I backed him and why I think he'll be a good PM.
You say it as if neoliberalism is a dangerous or extreme idea. Neoliberalism is a classic, sensible way to run the country.
Thousands of hungry kids, homeless people, underfunded public services and the rage that gave rise to Brexit would suggest otherwise.
OJ, who was I think 13 when Blair became PM, has never lived as an adult under anything other than a centrist regime, would never as a matter of a priori ideology think that a Tory government could be good, would do well to reflect that a Labour party led from the centre would win this election at a canter, and that the extremists in this campaign are his socialist friends.
I think it's rubbish that a centrist Labour would walk this election. This is Leave vs Remain through the prism of FPTP in a country where a landslide majority of seats are Leave seats. On top of that the Leave vote is consolidated far better than the Remain vote due to Johnson sidelining Farage. The election is timed and framed perfectly for the Cons. "Get Brexit Done" wins this regardless of the opposition.
Agree with most of this. We risk looking back on Ed Miliband with rose-tinted glasses; but in 2015 we were talking about how poorly Metropolitan Labour played with small town England, and I suspect that would still be the case with an Ed Miliband now.
But whe I know you've always predicted a Con majority of around 60, I just don't see it. Too many voters in places like Don Valley and Stoke will still vote Labour despite Jeremy. Most of those who will vote Con for Brexit in these seats had drifted away from Lab some time ago. It will be very, very tight.
OJ, who was I think 13 when Blair became PM, has never lived as an adult under anything other than a centrist regime, would never as a matter of a priori ideology think that a Tory government could be good, would do well to reflect that a Labour party led from the centre would win this election at a canter, and that the extremists in this campaign are his socialist friends.
I think it's rubbish that a centrist Labour would walk this election. This is Leave vs Remain through the prism of FPTP in a country where a landslide majority of seats are Leave seats. On top of that the Leave vote is consolidated far better than the Remain vote due to Johnson sidelining Farage. The election is timed and framed perfectly for the Cons. "Get Brexit Done" wins this regardless of the opposition.
There's polling evidence that Labour would not be doing better under a variety of alternative leaders, though it doesn't go as far as to hypothesise some completely different programme.
I think you're right, and the reason we're having this election rather than putting Brexit through on the basis of the majority that Johnson finally assembled is that the Conservatives felt it was a good moment, and they may well be right. Or not. We'll soon know...
I must say I'm surprised Labour agreed to the election. They had already refused it once before so I doubt there was much harm doing it again. To agree to an election in Winter where their canvassing is less effective, when University students are breaking up, with the Lib Dems riding high in the polls and with a new PM in a 3 month honeymoon period and with a Brexit deal fresh in public minds and a narrative of parliament against the people meant Labour started off with so many fundamentals against them.
With a centrist Labour I would probably not be voting for my idiot of an MP. I might not go as far a voting Labour, but I would be able to vote Lib Dem with a clear conscience.
And there are others like you. So, yes, I can accept that a centrist Labour would possibly do a little better. But not enough to turn a GE loss into a GE win, let alone a "walk it" win.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Boris will agree a deal by end of year and then extend the transition for ratification. Eurosceptics will be furious. Four years later they won't care.
I don't actually mind if he takes longer to get a trade deal, the main thing for a lot of leave voters like myself will be that Brexit is happening, it won't be blocked by parliament and a 2nd referendum will be stone dead. Throughout 2019 Brexit was very much in limbo and I would not have minded a delay if it was a government decision in our national interest rather than a deliberate attempt to thwart the democratic process.
Agreed. The most important thing is we leave 31st Jan 2020. As long as that happens, people will give Boris a bit of extra time on the trade deal provided it doesn't drag on too long (end of 2021 is fine)
You cannot be taken seriously on this, I'm afraid. The bias is too strong.
But you can when it comes to predictions. So, say the big man gets acquitted but dropped by the Republicans - I know I know, but just say that he does - does he run as an independent?
We have a call transcript documenting the quid pro quo. We have the man making the quid pro quo saying yes it was a quid pro quo and it came from the president. We have the firing of the former ambassador so the man who made the quid pro quo could be in place. We have the cover up by trying to stash the call transcript on a hidden server. We have the president making the demand in the quid pro quo on live TV. We have the obstruction of justice by blocking all witnesses and subpoenaed documents. What more evidence could we possibly get?
One of the particularly disappointing aspects of remainers not accepting a democratic decision is how many of our limited pool of talent have thrown away their careers on this. I think Chuka has more to add than most of our MPs as of course did Rory Stewart and even Dominic Grieve and Letwin.
Three years ago this week, the politician campaigning for revoke was saying this... and it wasn't because he thought we should revoke!
"Chuka Umunna today urged Remain campaigners to abandon calls for a second referendum or risk being seen as a metropolitan elite “who think they know best”.
In an interview with the Evening Standard, the influential Labour backbencher urged fellow pro-EU campaigners to show more respect for the 17 million who voted for Brexit
“Remain didn’t lose by a landslide but was clearly defeated at the ballot box on June 23,” he said.
“I think it’s really important we listen and more deeply understand why people took a different view to us.”
He added: “The 52 per cent are no more a bunch of racists and bigots than the 48 per cent are a well-heeled metropolitan elite. I have no time for either characterisation.”
“I really have no time for calls for a second referendum because I think it comes across as disrespectful to those who voted to leave,” he said.
“Those calls reinforce what I feel is a false stereotype — of a bunch of people in London who think they know best.”
And who can forget Chuka Harrison describing his fellow Londoners as trash.
You cannot be taken seriously on this, I'm afraid. The bias is too strong.
But you can when it comes to predictions. So, say the big man gets acquitted but dropped by the Republicans - I know I know, but just say that he does - does he run as an independent?
I don't give a rats ass if I'm taken seriously on it, I'm clearly not in the league of the legal and constitutional experts on here so why would I even try? The hilarious level of hatred he inspires is thoroughly bizarre. To answer your question he wont get dropped but if he did I neither know nor care if he would run as an independent. I suspect it will be moot and the loathing that will have been uncovered in the Democrats due to their dirty tricks and crimes will see him romp home. If I'm wrong you can all have a good chuckle at my expense, but dont for one moment think that the democrats arent actively shitting it about the investigations underway.
Having said that I think I will stick to uk matters, I'm not gonna convince the trump haters and they arent going to convince me. There will be no conviction, he will run in 2020 and it will be a long old 5 years if we keep having this discussion.
We have a call transcript documenting the quid pro quo. We have the man making the quid pro quo saying yes it was a quid pro quo and it came from the president. We have the firing of the former ambassador so the man who made the quid pro quo could be in place. We have the cover up by trying to stash the call transcript on a hidden server. We have the president making the demand in the quid pro quo on live TV. We have the obstruction of justice by blocking all witnesses and subpoenaed documents. What more evidence could we possibly get?
Well, quite. But @dyedwoolie has warm and fuzzy feelings for the Donald that go above and beyond the call. Allowances must be made.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
A Tory leader who just won a majority and a fourth consecutive term can move mountains within the party. Victory excuses all faults, defeat erases all virtues: see a certain T. May.
David Cameron won a majority in 2015 and was still forced into a referendum by the Eurosceptic right. The idea that they will play nice if Johnson seeks a two year extension and integration with the EU is for the birds. Since Major the Tory party has always seen leaders replaced by someone more hardline on Europe. Johnson will be looking over his shoulder constantly and knows that any hint of "vassalage" (aka not committing economic hari-kari) will lead to his rapid defenestration.
You cannot be taken seriously on this, I'm afraid. The bias is too strong.
But you can when it comes to predictions. So, say the big man gets acquitted but dropped by the Republicans - I know I know, but just say that he does - does he run as an independent?
We have a call transcript documenting the quid pro quo. We have the man making the quid pro quo saying yes it was a quid pro quo and it came from the president. We have the firing of the former ambassador so the man who made the quid pro quo could be in place. We have the cover up by trying to stash the call transcript on a hidden server. We have the president making the demand in the quid pro quo on live TV. We have the obstruction of justice by blocking all witnesses and subpoenaed documents. What more evidence could we possibly get?
And yet quid pro quo wont appear on the impeachment articles. How strange,
Chuka's team have certainly been trying very hard in Cities of London and Westminster, carpet-bombing innocent residents with dodgy bar-charts and fake newspapers. Amusingly Labour are also running bar-charts, based on the 2017 results, to make out that only Labour can beat the Tories here.
This is undoubtedly a good constituency for Chuka to try for, and I'm pretty sure that the LibDem blitz will take him past Labour. However, I think it will only take him into a respectable second place, not a win, not least because the Tory candidate seems sensible and is well-established locally (she's the leader of Westminster council).
I think it will be a great pity if Chuka does fail here; for all his mistakes, he's a sensible and articulate figure with more talent than most MPs, and the LibDems need all the talent they can get. I also think he deserves great credit, whether you agree with him or not, for calling out Corbyn and for putting his own career on the line. But more likely heroic failure than shock success.
Yep - the only place he was likely to be able to parachute into and win was Sheffield Hallam but even then I'm not sure a Londoner would work there.
He should have stood in Streatham doing the honourable thing.
At least since he did the 'chicken run' he isn't eligible for the 'parachute payment' many thousands of pounds that defeated MPs normally get. As the 'funny tinge' Tigger was horrified to find out.
Ooh, didn’t know that, I thought they just have to be defeated by the public, rather than specifically in the same constituency. For anyone who’s served since around 2010, it’s three months’ salary, so around £20k, tax free.
I just remember Miss 'funny tinge' claiming it was very unfair and terrifying and tha she was very upset to realise that because she'd changed seats she lost the parachute payment. She said she was being "discriminated against": https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexwickham/angela-smith-exit-payment
I was watching when she made the "funny tinge" comment. I was gobsmacked.
I will perhaps surprise people by saying that my hunch is to disagree. We will get a Soft Brexit FTA (Transition extended first) and the "Boris" government will be relatively innocuous. The worst thing about it will be that we will get used to having a risible clown as our PM and our standards will thus have been lowered.
I shared this piece earlier today to deafening silence. Hopefully someone might read it this time. I differ from you in thinking that we will likely get Thatcherism on steroids, for a few reasons. (1) they keep referring to themselves as "one nation" which is a clear sign they don't expect that impression to take hold as a result of their actions; (2) most genuinely "one nation" Tories have been purged while arch-Thatcherites have been promoted; (3) the donor class who promoted Johnson and hard Brexit all the way through May's tenure and are also active in dark money Thatcherite think tanks want a return on their investment; (4) Johnson himself has no philosophy but is instinctively neoliberal on economic issues and his advisors eg Cummings share that view; (5) every Tory leader from Major on has come to power by offering a more anti-EU platform than their predecessor, and so the idea that Johnson will pivot to BINO is for the birds - he'd face immediate challenge from the right of the party - and once you accept dis-alignment from the EU and the loss of market access then you have to embrace economic shock therapy to prevent capital flight.
Absolutely I think Boris is instinctively neoliberal as any good Tory should be. Its why I backed him and why I think he'll be a good PM.
You say it as if neoliberalism is a dangerous or extreme idea. Neoliberalism is a classic, sensible way to run the country.
Thousands of hungry kids, homeless people, underfunded public services and the rage that gave rise to Brexit would suggest otherwise.
Are you talking about Venezuela? Or anywhere the far left's policies have led to real poverty?
Rather than the so-called "relative poverty" we have in this country? Everyone in this country, even the poorest in it, are miles better off than the median population wherever Corbynomics has been tried out.
One of the particularly disappointing aspects of remainers not accepting a democratic decision is how many of our limited pool of talent have thrown away their careers on this. I think Chuka has more to add than most of our MPs as of course did Rory Stewart and even Dominic Grieve and Letwin.
Three years ago this week, the politician campaigning for revoke was saying this... and it wasn't because he thought we should revoke!
"Chuka Umunna today urged Remain campaigners to abandon calls for a second referendum or risk being seen as a metropolitan elite “who think they know best”.
In an interview with the Evening Standard, the influential Labour backbencher urged fellow pro-EU campaigners to show more respect for the 17 million who voted for Brexit
“Remain didn’t lose by a landslide but was clearly defeated at the ballot box on June 23,” he said.
“I think it’s really important we listen and more deeply understand why people took a different view to us.”
He added: “The 52 per cent are no more a bunch of racists and bigots than the 48 per cent are a well-heeled metropolitan elite. I have no time for either characterisation.”
“I really have no time for calls for a second referendum because I think it comes across as disrespectful to those who voted to leave,” he said.
“Those calls reinforce what I feel is a false stereotype — of a bunch of people in London who think they know best.”
And who can forget Chuka Harrison describing his fellow Londoners as trash.
No inconsistency there. The Lib Dems aren't calling for a second referendum any more.
Perhaps there might be something to see if any government became serious about breaking the link between super-strength, damaging marijuana and prohibition.
Interesting that neither Boris or Jezza have spent that much time in the Midlands, and virtually none in the West Midlands (that used to be thought of where you had to win, to win the GE). A lot in the North East and Scotland for Jezza. North East and South West for Boris. And no interest in Wales.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
A Tory leader who just won a majority and a fourth consecutive term can move mountains within the party. Victory excuses all faults, defeat erases all virtues: see a certain T. May.
David Cameron won a majority in 2015 and was still forced into a referendum by the Eurosceptic right. The idea that they will play nice if Johnson seeks a two year extension and integration with the EU is for the birds. Since Major the Tory party has always seen leaders replaced by someone more hardline on Europe. Johnson will be looking over his shoulder constantly and knows that any hint of "vassalage" (aka not committing economic hari-kari) will lead to his rapid defenestration.
We have a Shadow Chancellor in this country that is a fan of Chairman Mao and we have someone here on the left wants to talk about people going hungry? Don't be farcical, have a look at the hunger that Chairman Mao led to then come back to us . . .
Neoliberalism doesn't cause hunger. Extremist Marxism always has.
We have a call transcript documenting the quid pro quo. We have the man making the quid pro quo saying yes it was a quid pro quo and it came from the president. We have the firing of the former ambassador so the man who made the quid pro quo could be in place. We have the cover up by trying to stash the call transcript on a hidden server. We have the president making the demand in the quid pro quo on live TV. We have the obstruction of justice by blocking all witnesses and subpoenaed documents. What more evidence could we possibly get?
Well, quite. But @dyedwoolie has warm and fuzzy feelings for the Donald that go above and beyond the call. Allowances must be made.
There is something quite creepy and disturbing about you.
One of the particularly disappointing aspects of remainers not accepting a democratic decision is how many of our limited pool of talent have thrown away their careers on this. I think Chuka has more to add than most of our MPs as of course did Rory Stewart and even Dominic Grieve and Letwin.
Three years ago this week, the politician campaigning for revoke was saying this... and it wasn't because he thought we should revoke!
"Chuka Umunna today urged Remain campaigners to abandon calls for a second referendum or risk being seen as a metropolitan elite “who think they know best”.
In an interview with the Evening Standard, the influential Labour backbencher urged fellow pro-EU campaigners to show more respect for the 17 million who voted for Brexit
“Remain didn’t lose by a landslide but was clearly defeated at the ballot box on June 23,” he said.
“I think it’s really important we listen and more deeply understand why people took a different view to us.”
He added: “The 52 per cent are no more a bunch of racists and bigots than the 48 per cent are a well-heeled metropolitan elite. I have no time for either characterisation.”
“I really have no time for calls for a second referendum because I think it comes across as disrespectful to those who voted to leave,” he said.
“Those calls reinforce what I feel is a false stereotype — of a bunch of people in London who think they know best.”
And who can forget Chuka Harrison describing his fellow Londoners as trash.
You cannot be taken seriously on this, I'm afraid. The bias is too strong.
But you can when it comes to predictions. So, say the big man gets acquitted but dropped by the Republicans - I know I know, but just say that he does - does he run as an independent?
I don't give a rats ass if I'm taken seriously on it, I'm clearly not in the league of the legal and constitutional experts on here so why would I even try? The hilarious level of hatred he inspires is thoroughly bizarre. To answer your question he wont get dropped but if he did I neither know nor care if he would run as an independent. I suspect it will be moot and the loathing that will have been uncovered in the Democrats due to their dirty tricks and crimes will see him romp home. If I'm wrong you can all have a good chuckle at my expense, but dont for one moment think that the democrats arent actively shitting it about the investigations underway.
Having said that I think I will stick to uk matters, I'm not gonna convince the trump haters and they arent going to convince me. There will be no conviction, he will run in 2020 and it will be a long old 5 years if we keep having this discussion.
I have been an Anyone But Trump from the day of his announcement on. During the campaign against Hillary, I joked "Vote Trump, He'll Be Easier to Impeach". But I had not reckoned with the extraordinary moral contortions the Congressional GOP would go to in order to defend Trump (or more accurately, to avoid deselection by Trump backers and to hold onto GOP control of the Senate).
All that said, I fear Woolie is right. There is no way that this Senate will remove Trump from office on the basis of evidence that they claim may be unprecedented - morally wrong, even - but not criminal and not reaching the bar of 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. Whatever we may think of the quality of the existing evidence in Schiff's report, and CNN's and MSNBC's daily hysteria, it will take new evidence that the Congressional GOP and, more importantly, those voters identifying as Independents or Establishment GOP, consider a smoking gun. There is nothing on the table that meets that bar - yet (we can live in hope).
So, absent such new evidence, Trump will survive impeachment and will be the GOP candidate.
And if he is up against Warren or Sanders, he will win. And impeachment proceedings will damage the Democrats. And they will give Trump a year of throwing out hand grenades to see which ones hit the target.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
A Tory leader who just won a majority and a fourth consecutive term can move mountains within the party. Victory excuses all faults, defeat erases all virtues: see a certain T. May.
David Cameron won a majority in 2015 and was still forced into a referendum by the Eurosceptic right. The idea that they will play nice if Johnson seeks a two year extension and integration with the EU is for the birds. Since Major the Tory party has always seen leaders replaced by someone more hardline on Europe. Johnson will be looking over his shoulder constantly and knows that any hint of "vassalage" (aka not committing economic hari-kari) will lead to his rapid defenestration.
Wrong. He won that majority having made the promise of the referendum. Unless you are suggesting he should then have abandoned his election promise which was freely given, I am afraid your timeline is very much out of skew.
Re Chuka does anyone think labour supporters will back him
Labour activists no. They won't forgive him for bertaying their party. But I think a lot of previous Labour voters would vote for him. A lot of 2019 Labour voters in the UK will be voting Labour because of the lack of choice being offered and not because they really like the Corbyn leadership. Ummana is on the left of the LDs and has a chance to topple a conservative. If your not into tribal politics then there is little to keep you from switching.
Interesting that neither Boris or Jezza have spent that much time in the Midlands, and virtually none in the West Midlands (that used to be thought of where you had to win, to win the GE). A lot in the North East and Scotland for Jezza. North East and South West for Boris. And no interest in Wales.
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
A Tory leader who just won a majority and a fourth consecutive term can move mountains within the party. Victory excuses all faults, defeat erases all virtues: see a certain T. May.
What happens if the landslide/largish majority doesn't happen? What if it is a majority of, say 10?
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
Boris will agree a deal by end of year and then extend the transition for ratification. Eurosceptics will be furious. Four years later they won't care.
I don't actually mind if he takes longer to get a trade deal, the main thing for a lot of leave voters like myself will be that Brexit is happening, it won't be blocked by parliament and a 2nd referendum will be stone dead. Throughout 2019 Brexit was very much in limbo and I would not have minded a delay if it was a government decision in our national interest rather than a deliberate attempt to thwart the democratic process.
Agreed. The most important thing is we leave 31st Jan 2020. As long as that happens, people will give Boris a bit of extra time on the trade deal provided it doesn't drag on too long (end of 2021 is fine)
Poor SeanT (not). Mr Glenn really does deserve kudos and admiration for the courage of his bet. And he foolishly agreed it at evens, too.
Interesting that neither Boris or Jezza have spent that much time in the Midlands, and virtually none in the West Midlands (that used to be thought of where you had to win, to win the GE). A lot in the North East and Scotland for Jezza. North East and South West for Boris. And no interest in Wales.
Comments
I believe Boris will be pragmatic and will achieve a compromise but of course predicting how it pans out is impossible at present. The labour party would have serious issues if a good majority comes about and Jo Swinson, if she retains her seat, will also come under pressure
Most remainers prophecy doom and gloom but as Boris said today 150 billion of inward investment will follow next year and we may well do very well. I am on the fence on the economic outlook but in the end the vote of the people will have been respected, for good or bad
You say it as if neoliberalism is a dangerous or extreme idea. Neoliberalism is a classic, sensible way to run the country.
After the election she'll have time to consult a voice coach, as did Thatcher. IIRC she was regarded as 'shrill' at first.
Was David Icke On To Something? Pt.II:
Prince Andrew says he was physically incapable of sweating.
You know what else is physically incapable of sweating?
Lizards.
Just saying.
Will he survive ?
Plus Everton fans should be reminded that they got Sam Allardyce sacked for only finishing eighth.
You can see their problem though. Break ranks and they get trounced at the polls. Trump's base is all that stands between them and a rout. So whatever DT says, they have to go with it regardless of other consequences.
They fixed block quotes.
He currently has the support of the DM, Express and the Borisograph. Nobody ever mistook these for neoliberal. Nor is there anything neoliberal about Brexit.
Looks to me like a very right wing conservative government coming up, and he'll play along, I think, if it keeps him in office.
Meanwhile the reds keep marching on just to add insult to injury for the blues.
https://twitter.com/JohnGPeet/status/1202565930921930758
So the question is: can Boris do his Houdini act again and con his way out of his own brain-dead self-imposed deadline for a second time, this time without Letwin and Benn to blame ?
I hope the Tories win a healthy majority which will give him the breathing space to run a decent neoliberal government and not run every policy through all the extremes within the party. There are risks to healthy majorities but the last few years have shown the dangers of minority or small majority governments too.
A confession?
No disruption. No obstruction, no collusion!
Farage on with Neil tonight. Tune in for Nige's last hurrah.
I think you're right, and the reason we're having this election rather than putting Brexit through on the basis of the majority that Johnson finally assembled is that the Conservatives felt it was a good moment, and they may well be right. Or not. We'll soon know...
And of course Ukraine has expressly denied any coercion or quid pro quo, but what would they know?
A vote for Johnson is a vote for No Deal because the deadlines are impossible to meet.
The sooner that process starts, the better. Because then they can start forgetting about why it ever mattered.
But you can when it comes to predictions. So, say the big man gets acquitted but dropped by the Republicans - I know I know, but just say that he does - does he run as an independent?
But whe I know you've always predicted a Con majority of around 60, I just don't see it. Too many voters in places like Don Valley and Stoke will still vote Labour despite Jeremy. Most of those who will vote Con for Brexit in these seats had drifted away from Lab some time ago. It will be very, very tight.
To answer your question he wont get dropped but if he did I neither know nor care if he would run as an independent. I suspect it will be moot and the loathing that will have been uncovered in the Democrats due to their dirty tricks and crimes will see him romp home.
If I'm wrong you can all have a good chuckle at my expense, but dont for one moment think that the democrats arent actively shitting it about the investigations underway.
Having said that I think I will stick to uk matters, I'm not gonna convince the trump haters and they arent going to convince me. There will be no conviction, he will run in 2020 and it will be a long old 5 years if we keep having this discussion.
5th December should've been polling day (as I said)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EK9H7vPXkAAuxIF.jpg:large
I was gobsmacked.
Rather than the so-called "relative poverty" we have in this country? Everyone in this country, even the poorest in it, are miles better off than the median population wherever Corbynomics has been tried out.
Neoliberalism doesn't cause hunger. Extremist Marxism always has.
All that said, I fear Woolie is right. There is no way that this Senate will remove Trump from office on the basis of evidence that they claim may be unprecedented - morally wrong, even - but not criminal and not reaching the bar of 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. Whatever we may think of the quality of the existing evidence in Schiff's report, and CNN's and MSNBC's daily hysteria, it will take new evidence that the Congressional GOP and, more importantly, those voters identifying as Independents or Establishment GOP, consider a smoking gun. There is nothing on the table that meets that bar - yet (we can live in hope).
So, absent such new evidence, Trump will survive impeachment and will be the GOP candidate.
And if he is up against Warren or Sanders, he will win. And impeachment proceedings will damage the Democrats. And they will give Trump a year of throwing out hand grenades to see which ones hit the target.
A lot of 2019 Labour voters in the UK will be voting Labour because of the lack of choice being offered and not because they really like the Corbyn leadership. Ummana is on the left of the LDs and has a chance to topple a conservative. If your not into tribal politics then there is little to keep you from switching.
That was the online name he used.