Because it's important that he -rather than his successor- is in charge when the hangover from the Trump tax & spend kicks in. (Trump's fiscal policies are probably even looser than Jeremy corbyn's)
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
BMW (BMWG.DE) has delayed the development of its next generation Mini as it seeks to cut costs and as uncertainty over Britain’s trade relations with the European Union make long-term investment decisions harder.
And if you believe that you'll believe anything.
Car manufacturers don't have a clue at the minute how to deal with the massive transformations in their industry with regards to electric vehicles . . . and it doesn't help that politicians are still hesitating about whether or when to ban petrol and diesel engines . . . so companies investing in electric vehicles are going ahead like yesterday's news of major investment, while traditional companies are pausing before committing themselves.
Its got nothing to do with Brexit but that's a handy excuse to wait and see rather than "we don't know how to deal with our own industry at the minute".
Yeah, yeah, of course. Uncertaintly, possible tariffs, and disruptions to the supply chain have zero impact on multi-year investment plans. And we most certainly shouldn't listen to the people actually making the decisions. Yeah, right.
Or you can do a bit of research and see how BMW messed up the options they had for replacing the model - as I stated below they don't have a suitable platform on which to build a 3 door Mini (and I'm sure this news is at least 2 or more years old).
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
@Philip_Thompson is there anything you are prepared to accept is caused by Brexit?
The evidence suggests not.
Yes. Mr Farage is no longer an elected representative representing this country in a Parliament. I'm happy with that.
Also some European HQs (eg the EUs drugs HQ) have relocated overseas.
As for the auto industry? No. Not yet. Because the bigger picture evidence is that nothing yet is happening in the auto industry that doesn't match the wider bigger picture.
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
I enjoyed that!
Brexit is not the bigger picture here.
It's not the whole of the bigger picture, of course. No-one has claimed it is.
But, if you're planning to invest a billion euros in a new product line, and are weighing up where, what and how, it's not exactly something you are going to completely ignore, is it?
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
I enjoyed that!
Brexit is not the bigger picture here.
It's not the whole of the bigger picture, of course. No-one has claimed it is.
But, if you're planning to invest a billion euros in a new product line, and are weighing up where, what and how, it's not exactly something you are going to completely ignore, is it?
Successful companies are doing so. Struggling companies are pausing investment, they're not investing elsewhere instead.
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
I enjoyed that!
Brexit is not the bigger picture here.
It's not the whole of the bigger picture, of course. No-one has claimed it is.
But, if you're planning to invest a billion euros in a new product line, and are weighing up where, what and how, it's not exactly something you are going to completely ignore, is it?
The article suggests a trend of moving production from Oxford to the Netherlands since the Brexit vote. Presumably BMW will need to make the decision whether to keep both sites or move everything to the Netherlands.
BMW (BMWG.DE) has delayed the development of its next generation Mini as it seeks to cut costs and as uncertainty over Britain’s trade relations with the European Union make long-term investment decisions harder.
And if you believe that you'll believe anything.
Car manufacturers don't have a clue at the minute how to deal with the massive transformations in their industry with regards to electric vehicles . . . and it doesn't help that politicians are still hesitating about whether or when to ban petrol and diesel engines . . . so companies investing in electric vehicles are going ahead like yesterday's news of major investment, while traditional companies are pausing before committing themselves.
Its got nothing to do with Brexit but that's a handy excuse to wait and see rather than "we don't know how to deal with our own industry at the minute".
No, the established car companies are starting to make major investments. It's just if you look at almost all of them (a dozen or so battery plants, for example), they are in Europe, not the UK. It's true that they've been left flat footed by Tesla, and are going to struggle balancing the decline of their existing business with building a new one, but they have certainly started on the latter. How many of them will survive the process is an open question. like yesterday's news of major investment You mean the UPS van thing ? It is good news, but particularly big - and the bulk of them will be built outside of the UK anyway, of it all goes to plan.
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
I enjoyed that!
Brexit is not the bigger picture here.
It's not the whole of the bigger picture, of course. No-one has claimed it is.
But, if you're planning to invest a billion euros in a new product line, and are weighing up where, what and how, it's not exactly something you are going to completely ignore, is it?
Successful companies are doing so. Struggling companies are pausing investment, they're not investing elsewhere instead.
The Mini plant is something of a special case, and BMW value the British image. But probably not enough.
I always thought autos would be the sector most affected by Brexit. Simply it combines three factors:
1. Supply chains cross borders many times. Autoliv in France might sell to a subcomponent manufacturer in the UK who sells to BMW in Germany who ships the car back to the UK.
2. High reliance on just in time manufacturing. This isn't about tariffs. It's about the fact that you run with close to zero inventory because you expect your suppliers to be able to deliver in 36 hours.
3. Thin margins. Autos is highly competitive. Other than Porsche and Toyota, does any car maker get a better than 5% net margin? (And I'm not even sure Toyota does anymore)
Many other sectors have one of those factors - for example aerospace has international supply chains... But it also has far margins.
This is the missing link in the polling for the Labour leadership race. Two months in, more have a formed opinion of the candidates, and it's as good for Starmer as it is predictably bad for Long-Bailey.
If Labour were to have a leader with a net +5 favorability rating on the eve of GE polling day, they could well win.
I would not know, but the 'he's done wrong, but this punishment is not right' seems the way for the less shameless to justify what they were always going to do. Though given how some talk, and despite worship of the american founders and the system that subsequently developed, they don't seem to agree that any action could lead to removal.
Funnily enough, I worry about the long term viability of the European Union.
Despite that, the UK's decision isn unlikely to be a success in my judgment. There are too many false premises behind it.
This is going to sound like the most insufferable virtue signalling but one of the biggest reasons for me voting R was not to do with our direct national interest. It was that I thought - and think - the UK leaving would make the EU more likely to collapse, and as a consequence we could see a co-operative, peaceful bloc replaced by a fractured group of nations all aggressively competing to "make themselves great again".
The UK benefits from having a block of liberal democracies as neighbours, even if we can't bring ourselves to be part of it.
I would not know, but the 'he's done wrong, but this punishment is not right' seems the way for the less shameless to justify what they were always going to do. Though given how some talk, and despite worship of the american founders and the system that subsequently developed, they don't seem to agree that any action could lead to removal.
Hey, at ;east he didn't lie about extra-marital sex.
Because it's important that he -rather than his successor- is in charge when the hangover from the Trump tax & spend kicks in. (Trump's fiscal policies are probably even looser than Jeremy corbyn's)
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
That's a huge long term mistake from Starmer. Not in terms of becoming Labour leader, but in terms of his chances of eventually becoming PM. Just a month ago he was emphasising the need for Labour to move on from Brexit, which showed some tactical maturity. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-urges-labour-move-21218461
Now this speech effectively contradicts that and will be thrown back in his face. The Tories will love it if they can make the 2024 GE about whether or not the UK once again allows unrestricted migration from the EU.
It won't do Starmer any harm in the Labour leadership contest itself. However, the irony is that he's already so far ahead in the contest that he needs to be focused beyond that.
brexit date suspended on betfair. Seems a bit odd because 1 It is not 11pm yet. and 2. The legislation says "The European Communities Act 1972, as it has effect in domestic law or the law of a relevant territory immediately before exit day, continues to have effect in domestic law or the law of the relevant territory on and after exit day so far as provided by subsections (3) to (5)."
Note the "continues to have effect". So 72 Act continues to have effect during implementation period and that says "All such rights, powers, liabilities, obligations and restrictions from time to time created or arising by or under the Treaties, and all such remedies and procedures from time to time provided for by or under the Treaties, as in accordance with the Treaties are without further enactment to be given legal effect or used in the United Kingdom shall be recognised and available in law, and be enforced, allowed and followed accordingly" So the treaties continue in effect til Dec 2020 right?
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
God yes. Had forgotten them. Sarah Palin tickled their fancy, didn't she? Seem to recall they were "libertarian". They wanted virtually no government spending or taxes to speak of - very much laissez faire and tiny state - but I can't remember if they nevertheless wanted a big military and very robust border control.
That's a huge long term mistake from Starmer. Not in terms of becoming Labour leader, but in terms of his chances of eventually becoming PM. Just a month ago he was emphasising the need for Labour to move on from Brexit, which showed some tactical maturity. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-urges-labour-move-21218461
Now this speech effectively contradicts that and will be thrown back in his face. The Tories will love it if they can make the 2024 GE about whether or not the UK once again allows unrestricted migration from the EU.
It won't do Starmer any harm in the Labour leadership contest itself. However, the irony is that he's already so far ahead in the contest that he needs to be focused beyond that.
Starmer is targeting Tory Remainers and soft Leavers in London and the South and SNP voters it seems on a pro single market and free movement platform and abandoning much of the red wall and leaving it to Boris
This is the missing link in the polling for the Labour leadership race. Two months in, more have a formed opinion of the candidates, and it's as good for Starmer as it is predictably bad for Long-Bailey.
If Labour were to have a leader with a net +5 favorability rating on the eve of GE polling day, they could well win.
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
God yes. Had forgotten them. Sarah Palin tickled their fancy, didn't she? Seem to recall they were "libertarian". They wanted virtually no government spending or taxes to speak of - very much laissez faire and tiny state - but I can't remember if they nevertheless wanted a big military and very robust border control.
Its a shame that racists and xenophobes like Trump are in charge of the GOP and not libertarians. It would be a much better America if we had a libertarian President.
Funnily enough, I worry about the long term viability of the European Union.
Despite that, the UK's decision isn unlikely to be a success in my judgment. There are too many false premises behind it.
This is going to sound like the most insufferable virtue signalling but one of the biggest reasons for me voting R was not to do with our direct national interest. It was that I thought - and think - the UK leaving would make the EU more likely to collapse, and as a consequence we could see a co-operative, peaceful bloc replaced by a fractured group of nations all aggressively competing to "make themselves great again".
The UK benefits from having a block of liberal democracies as neighbours, even if we can't bring ourselves to be part of it.
From where I stand.
From where I stand, the EU was desperate for reform, and if it wouldn't reform then us leaving might help it get to the point where it could be reformed into something beneficial.
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
God yes. Had forgotten them. Sarah Palin tickled their fancy, didn't she? Seem to recall they were "libertarian". They wanted virtually no government spending or taxes to speak of - very much laissez faire and tiny state - but I can't remember if they nevertheless wanted a big military and very robust border control.
Its a shame that racists and xenophobes like Trump are in charge of the GOP and not libertarians. It would be a much better America if we had a libertarian President.
Sarah Palin straddled both strands.
The strands of xenophobic racism and Libertarianism? Should a prez with just a strand of xenophobic racism be wished for?
Kind of academic anyway, I'd guess the vast majority of tea partyers transferred to Trump pretty seamlessly.
That's a huge long term mistake from Starmer. Not in terms of becoming Labour leader, but in terms of his chances of eventually becoming PM. Just a month ago he was emphasising the need for Labour to move on from Brexit, which showed some tactical maturity. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-urges-labour-move-21218461
Now this speech effectively contradicts that and will be thrown back in his face. The Tories will love it if they can make the 2024 GE about whether or not the UK once again allows unrestricted migration from the EU.
It won't do Starmer any harm in the Labour leadership contest itself. However, the irony is that he's already so far ahead in the contest that he needs to be focused beyond that.
I doubt it will make much difference to anything. Johnson has proved you can say one thing one year and something comletely different the next and it doesn't matter, if the zeitgeist is with you. Come 2024 Brexit will either have been a success or failure. That is what will matter.
This is the missing link in the polling for the Labour leadership race. Two months in, more have a formed opinion of the candidates, and it's as good for Starmer as it is predictably bad for Long-Bailey.
If Labour were to have a leader with a net +5 favorability rating on the eve of GE polling day, they could well win.
Terrible numbers there for Long Bailey and not great for Thornberry or Nandy either, relatively good for Starmer though
The Nandy figures are basically "Dunno"
Yep - there is a lot of potential upside to Nandy's figures. I would love her to win. Starmer's numbers are a surprise. I would not have expected him to be in positive territory. But what they show is that he is not going to frighten potential Tory to LD switchers in the way that Corbyn did and Long-Bailey would. That is one important part of Labour's task over the coming four years.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
I don’t think all the UK car industry will go because at the end of the day we have high-end sports/luxury marques with global value, a customer base of 60m+ and we need right-hand drive vehicles here. I also suspect electric will take off fairly well here too, when it gets going.
But, I could certainly see serious consolidation amongst the Japanese and German mass carmakers, particularly those for export.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
Indeed. Its easier for BMW to buy time to get themselves out of this mess by saying "we're waiting to see what happens with Brexit" than to come out and say "we've screwed up". Its like Mr Nabavi has never heard of spin or PR.
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
I enjoyed that!
Brexit is not the bigger picture here.
It's not the whole of the bigger picture, of course. No-one has claimed it is.
But, if you're planning to invest a billion euros in a new product line, and are weighing up where, what and how, it's not exactly something you are going to completely ignore, is it?
The article suggests a trend of moving production from Oxford to the Netherlands since the Brexit vote. Presumably BMW will need to make the decision whether to keep both sites or move everything to the Netherlands.
The Dutch plant is third party and BMW have been reducing production there.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is:
1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum.
If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
It does seem like Labour have learnt the lesson of the Brexit debacle where straddling the fence ended up as a disaster. They have a strategic choice ahead of them about whether they go for the patriotism focused working class or the internationalist middle classes and are going with the latter.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
Slight aside but John Rentoul said that one of the very few things that change during the transition period is that EU nationals can not vote in local elections.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
It does seem like Labour have learnt the lesson of the Brexit debacle where straddling the fence ended up as a disaster. They have a strategic choice ahead of them about whether they go for the patriotism focused working class or the internationalist middle classes and are going with the latter.
The sensible next step is to embrace Rejoin.
I doubt that they have done any of that. The next election is not for a very long time.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is:
1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum.
If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
Not sure what the Tories could do to tie an incoming government's hand except to think of ways to stop people voting for it in the first place.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
It does seem like Labour have learnt the lesson of the Brexit debacle where straddling the fence ended up as a disaster. They have a strategic choice ahead of them about whether they go for the patriotism focused working class or the internationalist middle classes and are going with the latter.
The sensible next step is to embrace Rejoin.
I doubt that they have done any of that. The next election is not for a very long time.
It’s been a month and a half since the GE. The chances of anything other than reaction thought (as opposed to strategic thinking) in that time are near zero. That’s not a criticism of Labour to be clear. Expecting anything else is fanciful.
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
God yes. Had forgotten them. Sarah Palin tickled their fancy, didn't she? Seem to recall they were "libertarian". They wanted virtually no government spending or taxes to speak of - very much laissez faire and tiny state - but I can't remember if they nevertheless wanted a big military and very robust border control.
Its a shame that racists and xenophobes like Trump are in charge of the GOP and not libertarians. It would be a much better America if we had a libertarian President.
Sarah Palin straddled both strands.
The strands of xenophobic racism and Libertarianism? Should a prez with just a strand of xenophobic racism be wished for?
Kind of academic anyway, I'd guess the vast majority of tea partyers transferred to Trump pretty seamlessly.
No you misunderstood me. I would want a libertarian who is not a xenophobic racist.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is: 1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum. If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
You are proposing yet more Conservtive skulduggery as an answer to Labour skulduggery which you yourself have made up!
Brilliant
Why don´t you just burn down the Reichstag? (sp?) Then you can bring in a Conservative dictatorship, at no extra cost.
This is the missing link in the polling for the Labour leadership race. Two months in, more have a formed opinion of the candidates, and it's as good for Starmer as it is predictably bad for Long-Bailey.
If Labour were to have a leader with a net +5 favorability rating on the eve of GE polling day, they could well win.
Terrible numbers there for Long Bailey and not great for Thornberry or Nandy either, relatively good for Starmer though
If the trends are accurate the interesting question is going to be: How and why did the Marxist takeover over Labour membership fail so drastically and rapidly, without a fight? What was the point of taking over all the commanding heights of party organisation only to sell out to someone who was more or less mainstream?
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is: 1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum. If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
You are proposing yet more Conservtive skulduggery as an answer to Labour skulduggery which you yourself have made up!
Brilliant
Why don´t you just burn down the Reichstag? (sp?) Then you can bring in a Conservative dictatorship, at no extra cost.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is: 1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum. If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
You are proposing yet more Conservtive skulduggery as an answer to Labour skulduggery which you yourself have made up!
Brilliant
Why don´t you just burn down the Reichstag? (sp?) Then you can bring in a Conservative dictatorship, at no extra cost.
Try not to be such an ignorant dim witted moronic liar all your life.
Pigs are doing acrobatics over my house, The Guardian has a positive article about Brexit.
Catching up with the FT. The establishment can't remain the establishment and be on the wrong side of power.
Channel 4 News tonight hasn't quite got the message though. It was putting up continuous stuff from articulate regretful leader types speaking in all sorts of languages about how sad they were, and on the other hand some cheerful drunk Geordies and Mackems with tattoos and cowboy hats planning to get drunker tonight. Great fellers all, but not at their best adjacent to German Finance ministers talking in long words.
If the trends are accurate the interesting question is going to be: How and why did the Marxist takeover over Labour membership fail so drastically and rapidly, without a fight? What was the point of taking over all the commanding heights of party organisation only to sell out to someone who was more or less mainstream?
Or is there some other agenda not yet clear.
Or there never was a Marxist takeover. It was an invention of opponents.
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest. One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law). Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is: 1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum. If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
You are proposing yet more Conservtive skulduggery as an answer to Labour skulduggery which you yourself have made up!
Brilliant
Why don´t you just burn down the Reichstag? (sp?) Then you can bring in a Conservative dictatorship, at no extra cost.
Made up? Starmer just announced it as his policy!
Except that you Conservatives got in first, by disqualifying from voting anybody who not so sufficiently middle-class to have a driving licence or a passport.
Plus all the skulduggery at the last three general elections and the Referendum.
If the trends are accurate the interesting question is going to be: How and why did the Marxist takeover over Labour membership fail so drastically and rapidly, without a fight? What was the point of taking over all the commanding heights of party organisation only to sell out to someone who was more or less mainstream?
Or is there some other agenda not yet clear.
Or there never was a Marxist takeover. It was an invention of opponents.
Amazing how so many of the top leadership and their cheerleaders mysteriously turned out to be Marxists, then
Far be it for me to disagree with Keir but the concept of supply and demand seems to elude him. There's an argument for planned and controlled migration (just as there is an argument for planned house building instead of the current absurdity) but the Single Market encouraged anyone and everyone to move from the poorer parts of the EU to the richest. One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law). Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
Together with his musing that all residents, regardless of their citizenship, should be able to vote in national elections, this suggests that his personal period of reflection was little more than “I am right”. A lawyer to his very core.
If Labour sticks with its vote-rigging policy - literally adding millions of voters to the rolls because it knows it stands little chance of winning with the existing electorate - then the Tories need to respond in kind, and without mercy.
They can only do it if they win in the first place!
No, I presume their thinking is: 1. Become the largest party. 2. Do a deal with SNP/LD. 3. Expand the voting rolls by millions. 4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum. If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
You are proposing yet more Conservtive skulduggery as an answer to Labour skulduggery which you yourself have made up!
Brilliant
Why don´t you just burn down the Reichstag? (sp?) Then you can bring in a Conservative dictatorship, at no extra cost.
Made up? Starmer just announced it as his policy!
Except that you Conservatives got in first, by disqualifying from voting anybody who not so sufficiently middle-class to have a driving licence or a passport.
Plus all the skulduggery at the last three general elections and the Referendum.
We haven't done any such thing yet, and I'd be amazed if it had an effect comparable to adding millions of Left-leaning voters to the electorate.
As for your vague claims of skulduggery at other elections, I think you'd need to show your working...
This is the missing link in the polling for the Labour leadership race. Two months in, more have a formed opinion of the candidates, and it's as good for Starmer as it is predictably bad for Long-Bailey.
If Labour were to have a leader with a net +5 favorability rating on the eve of GE polling day, they could well win.
Reagan net approval at this point +17 Trump net approval -9
Unemployment is rising in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. All states Trump won by small margins.
That being said, I think the Libertarian candidate (oh please be John McAfee) will do much less well this time around, which probably adds two percentage points to Trump's share.
Yeah but Reagan had a lot of domestic problems going into 1980. Trump's in a stronger position. And never mind 'net approval.' It's all about polling against your opponent, where Trump will win hands down.
Weeks before the election, Reagan trailed Carter in most polls. In the Gallup poll on October 26, Jimmy Carter was at 47 percent and Ronald Reagan at 39 percent.
Trump's going to win bigger in the Electoral College than last time.
There are only really two realistic pick up chances for the Republicans this time around: Virginia and Nevada. (Unless Sanders is the nominee, of course, in which case New Hampshire and a whole bunch of other states come into play.)
Indeed, I could well imagine a situation where the Democrat and Republican vote shares are reversed, but the Democrats end up with more EC votes than in 2016.
(To demonstrate this, just do a Monte Carlo simulation on the 2016 results where you randomly jiggle the individual state results by a percent or two either way, while keeping the national vote shares the same. You'll find that the actual result is nowhere near the center point. Trump was extremely lucky to win a bunch of states by tiny margins.)
The Republican party will not win Virginia for another 40 years unless it's a landslide. And unless they lead the party registration vote in Nevada they won't win there either.
There is no realistic pickup for Republicans on a close vote.
New Hampshire is becoming a suburb of Boston. Minnessota is a refugee dumping groung for decades. Maybe Delaware and Maine in like 8 years.
I particularly enjoyed last night’s wafting away of the Brexit party in the European Parliament as a fringe. They were the party of choice of Leavers just 8 months ago.
They were the protest of choice. Anyone who thought they were a credible party was just fooling themselves.
I held no love for them, I despise Farage, but I voted for them purely to send a protest message to get Theresa May out and ensure the MPs next time put forward a more suitable candidate than May.
The message got through. May went and was replaced by Boris. Job done. The Brexit Party's job was done at that point.
If you voted for them, you are responsible for them being in the European Parliament and their antics that embarrass Britain.
“Shame” is a better word than “embarrass”. IMHO.
I disagree completely, no matter how humble the opinion. Shame is a word people really over use, and encourages the idea that everday people should feel really deeply about actions of others they may have nothing to do with or even abhor, because there is some overall stain on them by their association with their own country, and that if someone does not feel it so deeply they are in the wrong. Embarrassment leading to action to address that embarrassment is sufficient.
Perhaps I should have made myself clear. I feel ashamed when I see people like Ann Widdecombe ranting in the European Parliament about Britain being oppressed to people who, unlike her, either had direct experience of living in an oppressed country or had parents/grand-parents who did. People like her combine historical ignorance, offensive insensitivity and “poor little me being victimised” nonsense in a way which shows the worst - rather than the best - of Britain.
She is an educated woman, was an MP and Minister and ought to know better. So, yes, I feel ashamed of her behaviour and her fellow MEPs because it reflects on the rest of us and we are not all like that.
I particularly enjoyed last night’s wafting away of the Brexit party in the European Parliament as a fringe. They were the party of choice of Leavers just 8 months ago.
They were the protest of choice. Anyone who thought they were a credible party was just fooling themselves.
I held no love for them, I despise Farage, but I voted for them purely to send a protest message to get Theresa May out and ensure the MPs next time put forward a more suitable candidate than May.
The message got through. May went and was replaced by Boris. Job done. The Brexit Party's job was done at that point.
If you voted for them, you are responsible for them being in the European Parliament and their antics that embarrass Britain.
“Shame” is a better word than “embarrass”. IMHO.
I disagree completely, no matter how humble the opinion. Shame is a word people really over use, and encourages the idea that everday people should feel really deeply about actions of others they may have nothing to do with or even abhor, because there is some overall stain on them by their association with their own country, and that if someone does not feel it so deeply they are in the wrong. Embarrassment leading to action to address that embarrassment is sufficient.
Perhaps I should have made myself clear. I feel ashamed when I see people like Ann Widdecombe ranting in the European Parliament about Britain being oppressed to people who, unlike her, either had direct experience of living in an oppressed country or had parents/grand-parents who did. People like her combine historical ignorance, offensive insensitivity and “poor little me being victimised” nonsense in a way which shows the worst - rather than the best - of Britain.
She is an educated woman, was an MP and Minister and ought to know better. So, yes, I feel ashamed of her behaviour and her fellow MEPs because it reflects on the rest of us and we are not all like that.
I am saddened at how far Widdecombe has fallen into Farage loathsome attitudes
He says whatever he thinks the audience in front of him wants to hear so he plays to the gallery for the Scottish Conservatives but this act can't and won't work forever and audiences will end up not believing or trusting a word he says.
"The Tea Party fanatics that launched an uncompromising campaign on US public debt after the financial crisis are nowhere to be seen in the Trump era."
God yes. Had forgotten them. Sarah Palin tickled their fancy, didn't she? Seem to recall they were "libertarian". They wanted virtually no government spending or taxes to speak of - very much laissez faire and tiny state - but I can't remember if they nevertheless wanted a big military and very robust border control.
USA = socialism!
2.8 million folks employed by the Department of Defense (1.3 million under arms).
Just unnecessary and out of context with efforts being made by decent folk on both sides of the argument trying to dial the tone down
Oh give the F over you pious goon,
After THREE AND A HALF YEARS of Remainers LITERALLY trying to cancel democracy, while sneering at Leavers as racist thick monkeys, one night of hideous gloating is allowed.
Tomorrow we can all be nice again. But tonight, of all nights, we fight.
Comments
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/01/29/us-nears-1-trillion-dollar-debt-milestone-unsustainable-trump/
Tea Party? What did happen to them?
For news this to be coming 24 hours after news of major investment in the auto industry regarding electric vans in this country, on what could be called a "good day to bury bad news" it takes some naivety not to see the bigger picture BMW is embroiled in.
The evidence suggests not.
Also some European HQs (eg the EUs drugs HQ) have relocated overseas.
As for the auto industry? No. Not yet. Because the bigger picture evidence is that nothing yet is happening in the auto industry that doesn't match the wider bigger picture.
But, if you're planning to invest a billion euros in a new product line, and are weighing up where, what and how, it's not exactly something you are going to completely ignore, is it?
It's true that they've been left flat footed by Tesla, and are going to struggle balancing the decline of their existing business with building a new one, but they have certainly started on the latter.
How many of them will survive the process is an open question.
like yesterday's news of major investment
You mean the UPS van thing ?
It is good news, but particularly big - and the bulk of them will be built outside of the UK anyway, of it all goes to plan.
I can see BMW closing their UK plant.
https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1223303649289494533
And yes, BMW are investing elsewhere:
https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/21/bmw-locks-up-10-2-billion-euro-battery-order-ahead-of-ev-onslaught/
1. Supply chains cross borders many times. Autoliv in France might sell to a subcomponent manufacturer in the UK who sells to BMW in Germany who ships the car back to the UK.
2. High reliance on just in time manufacturing. This isn't about tariffs. It's about the fact that you run with close to zero inventory because you expect your suppliers to be able to deliver in 36 hours.
3. Thin margins. Autos is highly competitive. Other than Porsche and Toyota, does any car maker get a better than 5% net margin? (And I'm not even sure Toyota does anymore)
Many other sectors have one of those factors - for example aerospace has international supply chains... But it also has far margins.
https://twitter.com/NPRinskeep/status/1223306661235957764
https://twitter.com/NPRinskeep/status/1223307201500123139
https://www.bloomberg.com/energy
From where I stand.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-urges-labour-move-21218461
Now this speech effectively contradicts that and will be thrown back in his face. The Tories will love it if they can make the 2024 GE about whether or not the UK once again allows unrestricted migration from the EU.
It won't do Starmer any harm in the Labour leadership contest itself. However, the irony is that he's already so far ahead in the contest that he needs to be focused beyond that.
"The European Communities Act 1972, as it has effect in domestic law or
the law of a relevant territory immediately before exit day, continues to
have effect in domestic law or the law of the relevant territory on and
after exit day so far as provided by subsections (3) to (5)."
Note the "continues to have effect".
So 72 Act continues to have effect during implementation period and that says
"All such rights, powers, liabilities, obligations and restrictions from time to time created or arising by or under the Treaties, and all such remedies and procedures from time to time provided for by or under the Treaties, as in accordance with the Treaties are without further enactment to be given legal effect or used in the United Kingdom shall be recognised and available in law, and be enforced, allowed and followed accordingly"
So the treaties continue in effect til Dec 2020 right?
Sarah Palin straddled both strands.
Which sounds a little self-justificatory :-) .
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bmw-mini-exclusive-idUSKBN1ZU2DD
But, what do I know.. it’s not my country.
Kind of academic anyway, I'd guess the vast majority of tea partyers transferred to Trump pretty seamlessly.
Prince Philip and Princess Anne were well cast, but the episodes centring on them alone were as dull as hell.
And who cares about (a poorly cast) Prince Charles trying/failing to learn Welsh for 45 minutes from Plaid Cymru?
Utter dross.
One of the richest is London and that has meant an endless supply of cheap labour for construction sites and all other forms of manual labour (including that sitting outside the normal boundaries of the economy and even the law).
Moving to a more restricted labour force is going to be a jolt for the economy and may yet lead to a new round of capacity issues and wage inflation.
That is something we can finally agree on. The wackiest of libertarians would be vastly preferable to Donald Trump.
But, I could certainly see serious consolidation amongst the Japanese and German mass carmakers, particularly those for export.
"oil prices have seen downward pressure over the past week and a half as fears of oil demand destruction currently outweigh supply outages."
However, JFK was the youngest president at the date of his election as TR succeeded to the Presidency as McKinley's veep.
1. Become the largest party.
2. Do a deal with SNP/LD.
3. Expand the voting rolls by millions.
4. Gain a permanent advantage for the Left in every subsequent GE or referendum.
If the Tories don't prioritize ways of countering this strategy, then they are criminally negligent.
The sensible next step is to embrace Rejoin.
Pigs are doing acrobatics over my house, The Guardian has a positive article about Brexit.
Sarah Palin is both. That is a bad thing.
Brilliant
Why don´t you just burn down the Reichstag? (sp?) Then you can bring in a Conservative dictatorship, at no extra cost.
Or is there some other agenda not yet clear.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jan/30/keir-starmer-calls-on-government-to-give-eu-citizens-security: “In a piece for the Guardian, the shadow Brexit secretary wrote: “The government should give all EU nationals living in the UK full voting rights in future elections.“
Channel 4 News tonight hasn't quite got the message though. It was putting up continuous stuff from articulate regretful leader types speaking in all sorts of languages about how sad they were, and on the other hand some cheerful drunk Geordies and Mackems with tattoos and cowboy hats planning to get drunker tonight. Great fellers all, but not at their best adjacent to German Finance ministers talking in long words.
Hey chavs your problems are less important
Who's your favourite USA president?
Plus all the skulduggery at the last three general elections and the Referendum.
As for your vague claims of skulduggery at other elections, I think you'd need to show your working...
Larry Elliot is the Guardian's economics editor and voted leave. He's written many, many articles promoting Brexit.
Anybody know why?
https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1178621160046632960?s=20
And unless they lead the party registration vote in Nevada they won't win there either.
There is no realistic pickup for Republicans on a close vote.
New Hampshire is becoming a suburb of Boston.
Minnessota is a refugee dumping groung for decades.
Maybe Delaware and Maine in like 8 years.
She is an educated woman, was an MP and Minister and ought to know better. So, yes, I feel ashamed of her behaviour and her fellow MEPs because it reflects on the rest of us and we are not all like that.
https://twitter.com/LACaldwellDC/status/1223323536124796928
He says whatever he thinks the audience in front of him wants to hear so he plays to the gallery for the Scottish Conservatives but this act can't and won't work forever and audiences will end up not believing or trusting a word he says.
2.8 million folks employed by the Department of Defense (1.3 million under arms).
After THREE AND A HALF YEARS of Remainers LITERALLY trying to cancel democracy, while sneering at Leavers as racist thick monkeys, one night of hideous gloating is allowed.
Tomorrow we can all be nice again. But tonight, of all nights, we fight.