Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
You can be as arrogant as you want but the fact you still claim the Tory manifesto promised "only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters" is 100% wrong. It promised:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
If the LPF commitments mean we don't control our laws and money that is a violation.
End of conversation.
Seems it was too.
But back to what we were discussing the other day - Johnson's speech - I've been perusing the Daily Mail and they do not share yours and my tepid assessment. They say that he DID rise to the occasion. They don't use that exact phrase but if you read the coverage it's clear they think it was a top top performance. Perhaps we were not paying close enough attention.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
Not scared to fail, over, and over, and over again...
Well if we had stuck with the civil servants plans we would still be doing 20k tests a day.
On the other hand, if we'd spent £10bn on upgrading the existing local systems, rather than trying to centralise everything, might we be in a better place ?
You think some of the key swing states would vote for a gay presidential candidate ?
The elephant in the room that most commentators didn’t want to talk about during the primaries. He’d make a great member of Biden’s administration but his sexuality would be an issue for some people as a candidate . Personally I could care less , if you’re good enough that should be enough but I really don’t think the USA is liberal enough to accept a gay President yet.
"I could care less": I will never be able to read/hear this without it annoying the hell aout of me.
You think some of the key swing states would vote for a gay presidential candidate ?
The elephant in the room that most commentators didn’t want to talk about during the primaries. He’d make a great member of Biden’s administration but his sexuality would be an issue for some people as a candidate . Personally I could care less , if you’re good enough that should be enough but I really don’t think the USA is liberal enough to accept a gay President yet.
"I could care less": I will never be able to read/hear this without it annoying the hell aout of me.
There is a phrase "the only moral abortion is my abortion"
There are countless stories of anti-abortion activists getting abortions for he selves or their teenage daughters and then going straight back to abortion clinic picket lines. Their 'morality' is entirely vacuous and self serving.
This news will make not a dent in Trump's evangelical vote.
Quite so.
I missed any discussion of those Quinnipiac polls yesterday showing Biden miles ahead in Pa, Fla and also with a good lead in Iowa. Were they deemed solid or dodgy?
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
... at the time they were tested. Therefore including pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic in their number.
We know that pre-symptomatic spread is a key driver of this (and one of the things that meant that spread of Covid (SARS-CoV-2) is so much easier and further than SARS (SARS-CoV-1) - thank God SARS didn't have such a presymptomatic spread period).
I was banging on nearly three weeks ago about the rule that tests should be focused on symptomatic people only being stupid and counter-productive (if they've got symptoms, they should be self-isolating anyway, and even a negative test doesn't absolve them of that as it could be a false negative). Catching the pre-symptomatic before they spread it further is crucial.
...which is why in the early stage of Leicester etc, they were carpet bombing the place with Pillar 2 tests. Found tons of asymptomatic cases. Remember the farm in Herefordshire?
Tech people: does anyone know how I can save the image output of a HTML5 canvas? I can see it in the web inspector "graphics" tab in Safari developer tools, but no way of saving locally?
@edmundintokyo very good analysis before re the issues surrounding Harris and a challenge to her. I would also add it will be additionally harder because of her ethnicity, which will make it difficult for anyone, bluntly, who is white to challenge her. I think it will have to come from the likes of AOC.
Re Mike's header, I think he is spot on that the key to this election will be turnout. I'm thinking of betting on a low turnout definitely lower than 2016. What is clear looking from the vox pop of journalists whether it is the AP article on Detroit Black voters post-a speech by Kamala Harris, the LA Times piece on Nevada, the Federalist piece on swing counties in MIchigan or the pieces re a lack of enthusiasm from Latinos in Wisconsin and Florida, is that there is a large swathe of the population that is not enthused and sees little reason to vote. Hence the side that has the most enthused supporters, and more of them, will win. To me, that favours Trump. Not enough yet that I will put substantial sums on but it is trending that way.
The simple fact is, for whatever his fans say on here and / or profess to be converted by what they claim is his wonderful campaigning, Biden is a mediocre candidate and, to put bluntly, he has not done anything on this campaign that should enthuse voters nor change the view that people had of him in the primaries. I'm sure some will point to Gettysburg speech but they should also have the grace to acknowledge that turning round to Black voters and saying if you don't vote Democrat, "you ain't Black" is a disgrace, as if they are "owned" by the Democrats and one for which he never apologised personally and his campaign tried to pass off as a joke. The same Biden that Kamala Harris was praising to the skies is the same one she was attacking with such gusto in the primaries as willing to sit down with segregationists.
The same goes for Harris. The Twitterati love her because she is Democrat, Black and a person of colour which automatically means anything she says is automatically treated as a pearl of wisdom (and the same goes for here as well) but, again, she is a mediocre candidate who has a mixed track record as CA AG, tried to stop evidence being released that would free innocent prisoners and has facial expressions which are not "sassy" but just look, to most normal people (quick hint - they don't use Twitter nor use PB), weird and / or rude.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Not scared to fail, over, and over, and over again...
Well if we had stuck with the civil servants plans we would still be doing 20k tests a day.
On the other hand, if we'd spent £10bn on upgrading the existing local systems, rather than trying to centralise everything, might we be in a better place ?
I honestly don't think so, there's a good chance we wouldn't have spent the money and be stuck on 80-90k pillar 1 tests and now university labs pitching in for their students and faculty.
Not scared to fail, over, and over, and over again...
Well if we had stuck with the civil servants plans we would still be doing 20k tests a day.
On the other hand, if we'd spent £10bn on upgrading the existing local systems, rather than trying to centralise everything, might we be in a better place ?
I honestly don't think so, there's a good chance we wouldn't have spent the money and be stuck on 80-90k pillar 1 tests and now university labs pitching in for their students and faculty.
The initial screams were we should do it like Germany, look at how many tests they are doing...so we did and we do more....and now the screams are no no not like that....private company..boooooo...booooo....the fact is the testing system worked best when we had the man from Delmonte in charge.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
Wow! Tories fighting like rats in a sack. Is this a glimpse into the future?
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
I would rather have her and her cabinet in charge than the current incumbents
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
I would rather have her and her cabinet in charge than the current incumbents
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
This fills me with dread. I'm going to reserve judgement until we know what kind of agreement has been struck on the LPF, if it's anything like what the EU were asking for then I'll probably join whichever party pops up to abrogate the trade treaty.
If its what the EU were originally asking for it is absolutely unacceptable.
If its closer to what we agreed with the Japanese that is eminently agreeable.
The EU and the CJEU can not be the arbiters of it. Any arbitration must be neutral.
Gaining EG 5k votes in North Dorset but none in Stoke Central seems an interesting gamble for Labour....
You forget that many Red Wall and more traditional northern swing seats are semi-rural. This might go down well in the Torier areas of Dewsbury, for example.
FT is right, Cummings identifies problems that are valid but his solutions come across like he read a book on the concept and now has a degree in the area.
Take his discussions on AI for a start, it was a load of waffle
Cummings knows how to destroy. We have yet to see if he knows how to create anything of lasting value.
Tech people: does anyone know how I can save the image output of a HTML5 canvas? I can see it in the web inspector "graphics" tab in Safari developer tools, but no way of saving locally?
In Chrome's Dev Tools, you can select on it right a right click, select "Inspect" and then "Copy URL". Paste that in to a browser, display the image and click "Save As".
I never use Safari, but probably something similar is available
Gaining EG 5k votes in North Dorset but none in Stoke Central seems an interesting gamble for Labour....
You forget that many Red Wall and more traditional northern swing seats are semi-rural. This might go down well in the Torier areas of Dewsbury, for example.
Britain’s chief Brexit negotiator has signalled that Boris Johnson is ready to make key concessions and that a trade deal is “eminently achievable”.
Lord Frost told peers and MPs that No 10 was prepared to discuss commitments on subsidy policy that go beyond conventional trade agreements.
So basically, the No Deal threat has been called and the EU didn't fold. I am shocked that the UK in fact doesn't hold all the cards
At the same time, the EU is going to have to concede somewhat on fisheries. That's negotiating. Best result is everyone wins, but no-one gets everything they want.
Fishing was always a nothing argument from day one, why does it get so much attention despite being irrelevant to the UK?
Because it is not irrelevant. It is a sovereign natural resource that matters greatly to coastal communities - in case you haven't noticed our island nation has quite a few of them.
No, that's not it at all. Fishing matters because fishing matters to Michael Gove, who is a Brexiteer because he blames the EU and CFP for the loss of his family's fish-related business. Gove cares about fish. Cummings cares about state aid. Boris cares about Boris.
Britain’s chief Brexit negotiator has signalled that Boris Johnson is ready to make key concessions and that a trade deal is “eminently achievable”.
Lord Frost told peers and MPs that No 10 was prepared to discuss commitments on subsidy policy that go beyond conventional trade agreements.
So basically, the No Deal threat has been called and the EU didn't fold. I am shocked that the UK in fact doesn't hold all the cards
At the same time, the EU is going to have to concede somewhat on fisheries. That's negotiating. Best result is everyone wins, but no-one gets everything they want.
Fishing was always a nothing argument from day one, why does it get so much attention despite being irrelevant to the UK?
Because it is not irrelevant. It is a sovereign natural resource that matters greatly to coastal communities - in case you haven't noticed our island nation has quite a few of them.
No, that's not it at all. Fishing matters because fishing matters to Michael Gove, who is a Brexiteer because he blames the EU and CFP for the loss of his family's fish-related business. Gove cares about fish. Cummings cares about state aid. Boris cares about Boris.
So Gove is representative of the fishing communities I referred to is what you're trying to say?
FT is right, Cummings identifies problems that are valid but his solutions come across like he read a book on the concept and now has a degree in the area.
Take his discussions on AI for a start, it was a load of waffle
Cummings knows how to destroy. We have yet to see if he knows how to create anything of lasting value.
Teenagers hanging around phoneboxes are capable of destruction. So was Ghengis Khan. It is not exactly a desirable attribute, but it certainly is creative if you like broken stuff and piles of rubble...
I view Cummings as a wrecker with delusions of grandeur.
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
We can all sleep soundly tonight knowing that @HYUFD is the only Gay Tory in the village
"Local leaders have warned that people will see this weekend as "their last chance before Christmas" to have a party, as they attack the Government for dragging its heels on new restrictions in England.
David Mellen, leader of Nottingham City Council, told Radio 4's Today programme that even though the city had "very high numbers" they now had to "wait until next week for the Government to bring in what we expect to be new restrictions".
As well as that allowing the virus extra time to spread, that could mean "people think 'this is our last chance before Christmas' and go have a party," Mr Mellen said. "We can't have that." "
Britain’s chief Brexit negotiator has signalled that Boris Johnson is ready to make key concessions and that a trade deal is “eminently achievable”.
Lord Frost told peers and MPs that No 10 was prepared to discuss commitments on subsidy policy that go beyond conventional trade agreements.
So basically, the No Deal threat has been called and the EU didn't fold. I am shocked that the UK in fact doesn't hold all the cards
At the same time, the EU is going to have to concede somewhat on fisheries. That's negotiating. Best result is everyone wins, but no-one gets everything they want.
Fishing was always a nothing argument from day one, why does it get so much attention despite being irrelevant to the UK?
Because it is not irrelevant. It is a sovereign natural resource that matters greatly to coastal communities - in case you haven't noticed our island nation has quite a few of them.
No, that's not it at all. Fishing matters because fishing matters to Michael Gove, who is a Brexiteer because he blames the EU and CFP for the loss of his family's fish-related business. Gove cares about fish. Cummings cares about state aid. Boris cares about Boris.
So Gove is representative of the fishing communities I referred to is what you're trying to say?
Gove lied about his father’s fishing business. He cared about fishing only to the extent that he could use an untruth about it to help his career.
I personally think the Government should invest in a huge public safety campaign about limiting social contacts, social distancing, hygiene etc. Billboards, internet, TV, radio. Even on the BBC.
Slash corporation tax, VAT, alcohol duty, and employers NI to 0 for hospitality.
Make their businesses viable even with much reduced numbers.
Invest in many more Health and Safety inspectors to inspect VENUES not people. Huge sanctions for businesses who break the rules including directors themselves. Incentivise people to whistleblow on venues. Protect employees at these venues from retribution.
Thoughts?
Sounds better than closing them down or putting them out of business for 3%. Gets my vote.
3% seems very low. See Figure 12 here which puts 'hospitality' as the 2nd or 3rd greatest factor (not just pubs, I assume). And once you have told people again to people behave in terms of meeting at home, it's the largest single target (other than transmission within the family, which you can't control short of breaking up families)...
But isn't that partly how the Chinese got it under control - mass testing & isolation of infected individuals away from their homes ?
Actually, it's a great deal worse than that. "Just 68.8% of cases in England being reached and told to self-isolate to stop the spread of the virus" refers to contacts of those who were tested - and we know that the vast majority of those were symptomatic individuals. So we barely reach the contacts of those who were asymptomatic at all.
The government seems determined to walk headlong into a chlorinated chicken shaped trap of its own construction.
Clever response by Labour.
I don't think the government has a choice. It can't rule out what might be under discussion in trade talks - it's the conclusion that it wants to be judged on.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
You win elections, you lose elections, that is the nature of the electoral cycle and 9 years after 2001 the Tories were back in power but loyalty to the party comes through good times and bad, including the defeats as well as the victories.
If you are not willing to fully commit to that you do not really get much say in what the party does when it does get into power.
I expect those who stayed loyal to Labour from 2010 to 2019 would feel similar about those jumping on the back of a Starmer win in 2024 having voted Tory or LD during Labour's time in opposition now thinking they could direct all Labour party policy
Trump's team agree to a virtual debate. Trump announces on air he won't do it. Will the team talk him round?
Think about it - what an opportunity for him. On a Virtual debate I assume the application of the "will you shut up man" rules would place him on mute.
"I WAS GAGGED BY THE FAKE MEDIA" - raw meat to his core audience. Instead he is wussing out. As you say, spectacular news for Biden.
"Local leaders have warned that people will see this weekend as "their last chance before Christmas" to have a party, as they attack the Government for dragging its heels on new restrictions in England.
David Mellen, leader of Nottingham City Council, told Radio 4's Today programme that even though the city had "very high numbers" they now had to "wait until next week for the Government to bring in what we expect to be new restrictions".
As well as that allowing the virus extra time to spread, that could mean "people think 'this is our last chance before Christmas' and go have a party," Mr Mellen said. "We can't have that." "
Telegraph
Cannot win here. Introduce with no lead in and no one can prepare or understand. Wait and people say it reduces effectiveness.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
Did you vote for a Party in the Euro elections? If you did, you didn't vote for "no MEPs". If you voted for Farage's crowd you just voted to waste our money on approx 30 odd trouble makers in the parliament who were paid for the priviledge of causing trouble. The whole history of UKIP/Brexit were wreckers who never did any meaningful work!
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
If we're grading on that scale, you are a leadership-worshipping Tory loyalist fanatic, to whom considerations other than party loyalty are entirely secondary.
Trump pulling out of the second debate must put a severe strain on the Biden campaign's champagne budget.
Absolutely!
I thought Trump would show as little regard to the Hatch Act as he did during his Conference. Sit at the Resolute Desk for the debate. Make it as blatant as he could.
Latest test and trace figures make for grim reading.
"For cases handled by local health protection teams, 97.1 % of contacts were reached and asked to self-isolate in the week to September 30. In contrast, cases handled online or by call centres returned a 62.4 % successful contact rate."
I personally think the Government should invest in a huge public safety campaign about limiting social contacts, social distancing, hygiene etc. Billboards, internet, TV, radio. Even on the BBC.
Slash corporation tax, VAT, alcohol duty, and employers NI to 0 for hospitality.
Make their businesses viable even with much reduced numbers.
Invest in many more Health and Safety inspectors to inspect VENUES not people. Huge sanctions for businesses who break the rules including directors themselves. Incentivise people to whistleblow on venues. Protect employees at these venues from retribution.
Thoughts?
Sounds better than closing them down or putting them out of business for 3%. Gets my vote.
3% seems very low. See Figure 12 here which puts 'hospitality' as the 2nd or 3rd greatest factor (not just pubs, I assume). And once you have told people again to people behave in terms of meeting at home, it's the largest single target (other than transmission within the family, which you can't control short of breaking up families)...
But isn't that partly how the Chinese got it under control - mass testing & isolation of infected individuals away from their homes ?
You are referring to family breakup by 'that', I take it? I rather think I don't know enough about China to comment sensibly.
Edit PS - not trying to be rude, just don't have anything useful to say!
Britain’s chief Brexit negotiator has signalled that Boris Johnson is ready to make key concessions and that a trade deal is “eminently achievable”.
Lord Frost told peers and MPs that No 10 was prepared to discuss commitments on subsidy policy that go beyond conventional trade agreements.
So basically, the No Deal threat has been called and the EU didn't fold. I am shocked that the UK in fact doesn't hold all the cards
At the same time, the EU is going to have to concede somewhat on fisheries. That's negotiating. Best result is everyone wins, but no-one gets everything they want.
Fishing was always a nothing argument from day one, why does it get so much attention despite being irrelevant to the UK?
Because it is not irrelevant. It is a sovereign natural resource that matters greatly to coastal communities - in case you haven't noticed our island nation has quite a few of them.
No, that's not it at all. Fishing matters because fishing matters to Michael Gove, who is a Brexiteer because he blames the EU and CFP for the loss of his family's fish-related business. Gove cares about fish. Cummings cares about state aid. Boris cares about Boris.
So Gove is representative of the fishing communities I referred to is what you're trying to say?
Gove lied about his father’s fishing business. He cared about fishing only to the extent that he could use an untruth about it to help his career.
I agree that the story of Gove senior's fish business isn't the way Michael likes to tell it, but it could still be the story that young Michael told himself to make sense of his life... and in that sense it's real and a part of what's driven him, even if not true.
Since it's pretty clear that Boris also has massive Daddy issues (and frankly, who can blame him?), it's hard not to wonder what Dom's excuse is.
PS Just starting looking at the Luntz feedback group - one person thought Harris won, Luntz said "Overwhelmingly, people thought Pence won"
Slightly different from the consensus on here
Makes no difference.
Depends. Look for the TV ratings for last night's debate. If it's the same trend as for the first debate, then agreed. If there is a radical difference (if better), that suggests people are paying attention to the possibility one of the two could be President so need to be scrutinised
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
Did you vote for a Party in the Euro elections? If you did, you didn't vote for "no MEPs". If you voted for Farage's crowd you just voted to waste our money on approx 30 odd trouble makers in the parliament who were paid for the priviledge of causing trouble. The whole history of UKIP/Brexit were wreckers who never did any meaningful work!
I never voted for UKIP when that was meaningful.
In 2019 the UK wasn't even supposed to be in the European Parliament anymore! I didn't want "meaningful work" to be done by our MEPs. What "meaningful work" should they be doing when they should already not have a job?
It was a protest vote to MPs who matter. The MEPs were irrelevant.
Sounds like a mis-step from the Donald, but I note Sporting Index has backtracked a couple of points. Biden ECVs now down to 314/320. Anyone think why?
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
Did you vote for a Party in the Euro elections? If you did, you didn't vote for "no MEPs". If you voted for Farage's crowd you just voted to waste our money on approx 30 odd trouble makers in the parliament who were paid for the priviledge of causing trouble. The whole history of UKIP/Brexit were wreckers who never did any meaningful work!
I never voted for UKIP when that was meaningful.
In 2019 the UK wasn't even supposed to be in the European Parliament anymore! I didn't want "meaningful work" to be done by our MEPs. What "meaningful work" should they be doing when they should already not have a job?
It was a protest vote to MPs who matter. The MEPs were irrelevant.
I happened to vote tory at that election practically on a coin toss, but given how few others did odds are a lot of tory mps and cllrs didnt yet are presumably still proper tories.
There is a phrase "the only moral abortion is my abortion"
There are countless stories of anti-abortion activists getting abortions for he selves or their teenage daughters and then going straight back to abortion clinic picket lines. Their 'morality' is entirely vacuous and self serving.
Name one. I think this is vanishingly rare.
More on topic, I think for those of use who are very clear that abortion is immoral and essentially murder, this poses a difficult moral problem.
Banning the use of tissue from current abortions is clearly the right thing to do - especially given the unpleasant actions of various abortion providers to profit from selling said tissue. There is a whole chain of bad incentives which should be stopped. Personally I wouldn't accept any treatment (even life-saving) which I knew had been developed on this basis.
What however should one do about historic stuff? I think there one can perhaps make an case like this: Imagine my dad is murdered (obviously against my wishes). It's not wrong for me to inherit his money. It would be wrong if I had my dad murdered (for his money or otherwise).
Taking advantage (as a society) of the historic wrong of aborting a baby in the 70s and using the tissue for medical research is rather like my first example. Using current tissue is for our society much nearer the latter.
All that said, I think I'd hesitate to accept any treatment I knew to have been developed via abortion procured tissue.
That said, it's difficult to know what treatments have been developed in this way. I doubt Trump knew at the time (I'm much better informed than the average person on this, but I suspect I'd find some nasty surprises if I had more time to go looking), so coming back at him for a Gotcha moment seems pretty unfair.
You think some of the key swing states would vote for a gay presidential candidate ?
The elephant in the room that most commentators didn’t want to talk about during the primaries. He’d make a great member of Biden’s administration but his sexuality would be an issue for some people as a candidate . Personally I could care less , if you’re good enough that should be enough but I really don’t think the USA is liberal enough to accept a gay President yet.
"I could care less": I will never be able to read/hear this without it annoying the hell aout of me.
I actually approve this usage, as a clear case of elision. The un-elided phrase is clearly "I could care less, but it would be a great effort to do so".
Trump pulling out of the second debate must put a severe strain on the Biden campaign's champagne budget.
Absolutely!
I thought Trump would show as little regard to the Hatch Act as he did during his Conference. Sit at the Resolute Desk for the debate. Make it as blatant as he could.
He's giving up isn't he? He knows he has lost.
Question: Can now Biden just pull out of the third debate without looking weak/afraid?
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers those points.
End of conversation
This weird. Now I have no idea what was in the Tory manifesto but if it said what Philip says it says which I assume you aren't disputing, ie taking back control of our laws and our money, then that applies to all laws and money issues that the EU has some control over doesn't it?
If you require them all to be specifically spelt out in the manifesto rather than a very clear coverall then that implies the Conservative leavers will be happy with the EU retaining control of all tax and spending and EU legislation that hasn't been specifically mentioned in the manifesto.
I'm sure that isn't the case.
If you are happy with the EU retaining control over state subsidies (or otherwise, remember the EU is general against them [in theory anyway] so could stop a subsidy), then what other money matters and laws, not specifically mentioned in the Tory manifesto, are you happy for the EU to control? Presumably all of them.
Boom. Looks like State Aid will be wrapped up in next week and then there'll be a political call on fish very late doors. We should be ok.
"One EU source said that Mr Barnier had told diplomats: “Maintaining the status quo in UK waters will not be feasible. So the most concerned member states will need to explore room to move towards the UK in terms of quota allocation; provided the UK meets the EU on governance and state aid.”
If Johnson falls for that he's become Boris In Name Only.
He won't, there was no 2019 Tory manifesto promise on state aid only on fishing
You're wrong. This is the promise:
"This future relationship will be one that allows us to:
Take back control of our laws.
Take back control of our money.
Control our own trade policy.
Introduce an Australian-style points based immigration system.
Raise standards in areas like workers’ rights, animal welfare, agriculture and the environment.
Ensure we are in full control of our fishing waters."
State aid is control of our laws and control of our money. Literally the first two things promised.
No it isn't, handing state bailouts to companies is not taking back control of our laws nor our money, it is intervention to distort the free market.
As I correctly said there was no manifesto promise specifically to reclaim control of state aid
I obviously have no idea what has been agreed, but if you don't have control over decisions about state aid then as Philip says you haven't got control over 'our' laws and 'our' money. It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on re state aid.
Reducing ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and the supremacy of EU law over the UK and ending our annual payments to Brussels all are reclaiming control of our laws and money enough to satisfy that part of the manifesto, I repeat there was no specific promise in the winning 2019 Tory manifesto to regain control of state aid, only an obsession by Philip's hero Dominic Cummings.
HYUFD, quoting other areas where you have taken back control doesn't mitigate the situation if you don't have control over state aid. I have no idea if this is the case, but if it is then this is an area where you have not taken back control of your laws or your money. As I said it doesn't matter what side you are on, whether you are in favour or against state aid, if you don't have control over the decisions you do not have control of your laws or your money in this area.
If the Tory manifesto said you would then you have breached the manifesto. Simples.
No, I am a Tory activist not you and also more so than Philip who voted Labour in 2001 and Brexit Party in 2019 at the Euros when I voted Tory in all those elections so I will also take no lectures from him on what Tory policy is.
I know what was in the Tory manifesto, there was no specific promise to regain control of state aid, zero, nada, only to end free movement, do our own trade deals and regain control of fishing waters.
Brexit by itself now having being delivered reduces EU law over the UK and also our annual subsidies to Brussels which covers that point.
End of conversation
I'm unsure why you think that having undying loyalty to the "Conservative Party" is a good thing?
If you want to tell me what Tory policy should be you should certainly show some consistent loyalty to the party, if not I am not that interested especially when there is no requirement in the winning Tory manifesto for it.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
I voted for Blair when Blair and Brown were sticking to Ken Clarke's plans and managing the economy well. I didn't after 2001.
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
You voted Labour in 2001, you voted Brexit Party in 2019 and to continue Farage's membership of the European Parliament at that time which he duly continued until this year
Millions more voted Labour in 2001 than Tories. Rather than turning your nose up at people that you were on the losing side, maybe you should stop slapping yourself on the back for one second and ask why that happened?
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
Did you vote for a Party in the Euro elections? If you did, you didn't vote for "no MEPs". If you voted for Farage's crowd you just voted to waste our money on approx 30 odd trouble makers in the parliament who were paid for the priviledge of causing trouble. The whole history of UKIP/Brexit were wreckers who never did any meaningful work!
If that had done some work they may have learnt about the workings of the organisation and it’s benefits.
"Local leaders have warned that people will see this weekend as "their last chance before Christmas" to have a party, as they attack the Government for dragging its heels on new restrictions in England.
David Mellen, leader of Nottingham City Council, told Radio 4's Today programme that even though the city had "very high numbers" they now had to "wait until next week for the Government to bring in what we expect to be new restrictions".
As well as that allowing the virus extra time to spread, that could mean "people think 'this is our last chance before Christmas' and go have a party," Mr Mellen said. "We can't have that." "
Telegraph
Cannot win here. Introduce with no lead in and no one can prepare or understand. Wait and people say it reduces effectiveness.
What will happen with instantly introducing changes - "Local political slams changes without consultation - doesn't match condition on the ground"
Sounds like a mis-step from the Donald, but I note Sporting Index has backtracked a couple of points. Biden ECVs now down to 314/320. Anyone think why?
Maybe the voters liked the fly.......
Trump made an ass of himself at the first debate, so avoiding the next one might help him a little.
Trump pulling out of the second debate must put a severe strain on the Biden campaign's champagne budget.
But where will they get their clips of Trump saying terrible things for their Facebook ads now?
Trump saying terrible things may, strictly, be a finite resource, but only in the same way that solar energy is strictly a finite resource. There will be no shortage in our lifetimes.
"Local leaders have warned that people will see this weekend as "their last chance before Christmas" to have a party, as they attack the Government for dragging its heels on new restrictions in England.
David Mellen, leader of Nottingham City Council, told Radio 4's Today programme that even though the city had "very high numbers" they now had to "wait until next week for the Government to bring in what we expect to be new restrictions".
As well as that allowing the virus extra time to spread, that could mean "people think 'this is our last chance before Christmas' and go have a party," Mr Mellen said. "We can't have that." "
Telegraph
Cannot win here. Introduce with no lead in and no one can prepare or understand. Wait and people say it reduces effectiveness.
There would be much less of a problem with the former if the government compensated venues in full for the lost stock. It’s the combination of no notice and having to bear the cost which is seriously damaging. This stuff is not hard - or it wouldn’t be if the government actually talked to any of the people involved in the sectors they are targeting.
But expertise of any kind is not valued. So we have government by morons.
Comments
But back to what we were discussing the other day - Johnson's speech - I've been perusing the Daily Mail and they do not share yours and my tepid assessment. They say that he DID rise to the occasion. They don't use that exact phrase but if you read the coverage it's clear they think it was a top top performance. Perhaps we were not paying close enough attention.
Philip Thompson is a Blair voting, Farage voting, Cummings worshipping fanatic on Brexit not a loyal Tory
Trump's backdrop shouldn't be the Oval Office, it should be neutral.
No, not take over the private labs. Simply reduce testing capability back to Pillar 1. Which should be "properly rationed". Apparently.
Similarly - non-lab testing (the 20 minute stuff) is a "morale problem" for the labs. AKA a threat to an empire.
It's when you hear about stuff like this, that you begin to understand why Cummings et al think as they do.
I missed any discussion of those Quinnipiac polls yesterday showing Biden miles ahead in Pa, Fla and also with a good lead in Iowa. Were they deemed solid or dodgy?
I never voted for Farage. Which Parliament is Farage a member of thanks to my vote? 🙄
Re Mike's header, I think he is spot on that the key to this election will be turnout. I'm thinking of betting on a low turnout definitely lower than 2016. What is clear looking from the vox pop of journalists whether it is the AP article on Detroit Black voters post-a speech by Kamala Harris, the LA Times piece on Nevada, the Federalist piece on swing counties in MIchigan or the pieces re a lack of enthusiasm from Latinos in Wisconsin and Florida, is that there is a large swathe of the population that is not enthused and sees little reason to vote. Hence the side that has the most enthused supporters, and more of them, will win. To me, that favours Trump. Not enough yet that I will put substantial sums on but it is trending that way.
The simple fact is, for whatever his fans say on here and / or profess to be converted by what they claim is his wonderful campaigning, Biden is a mediocre candidate and, to put bluntly, he has not done anything on this campaign that should enthuse voters nor change the view that people had of him in the primaries. I'm sure some will point to Gettysburg speech but they should also have the grace to acknowledge that turning round to Black voters and saying if you don't vote Democrat, "you ain't Black" is a disgrace, as if they are "owned" by the Democrats and one for which he never apologised personally and his campaign tried to pass off as a joke. The same Biden that Kamala Harris was praising to the skies is the same one she was attacking with such gusto in the primaries as willing to sit down with segregationists.
The same goes for Harris. The Twitterati love her because she is Democrat, Black and a person of colour which automatically means anything she says is automatically treated as a pearl of wisdom (and the same goes for here as well) but, again, she is a mediocre candidate who has a mixed track record as CA AG, tried to stop evidence being released that would free innocent prisoners and has facial expressions which are not "sassy" but just look, to most normal people (quick hint - they don't use Twitter nor use PB), weird and / or rude.
As for the European Parliament election it should never have taken place. We were supposed to leave before the elections even happened. It was only due to Theresa May's abject failure the election even happened - that you rewarded her abject failure by voting for her again is not something to be proud of.
I didn't elect an MEP, I voted we should have no MEPs at all. The election shouldn't have even happened. It brought down the worst Prime Minister of my lifetime. I'm glad for that vote.
Seemed mediocre in the job but given what happened afterwards looks better and better in hindsight.
Slightly different from the consensus on here
Blessed if I know...
I never use Safari, but probably something similar is available
I view Cummings as a wrecker with delusions of grandeur.
GayTory in the villageDavid Mellen, leader of Nottingham City Council, told Radio 4's Today programme that even though the city had "very high numbers" they now had to "wait until next week for the Government to bring in what we expect to be new restrictions".
As well as that allowing the virus extra time to spread, that could mean "people think 'this is our last chance before Christmas' and go have a party," Mr Mellen said. "We can't have that." "
Telegraph
Piles perhaps. An ingrowing toenail. Something of that nature.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1314177733350563840
Clever response by Labour.
"Just 68.8% of cases in England being reached and told to self-isolate to stop the spread of the virus" refers to contacts of those who were tested - and we know that the vast majority of those were symptomatic individuals.
So we barely reach the contacts of those who were asymptomatic at all.
If you are not willing to fully commit to that you do not really get much say in what the party does when it does get into power.
I expect those who stayed loyal to Labour from 2010 to 2019 would feel similar about those jumping on the back of a Starmer win in 2024 having voted Tory or LD during Labour's time in opposition now thinking they could direct all Labour party policy
Think about it - what an opportunity for him. On a Virtual debate I assume the application of the "will you shut up man" rules would place him on mute.
"I WAS GAGGED BY THE FAKE MEDIA" - raw meat to his core audience. Instead he is wussing out. As you say, spectacular news for Biden.
Apparently.
I thought Trump would show as little regard to the Hatch Act as he did during his Conference. Sit at the Resolute Desk for the debate. Make it as blatant as he could.
He's giving up isn't he? He knows he has lost.
"For cases handled by local health protection teams, 97.1 % of contacts were reached and asked to self-isolate in the week to September 30. In contrast, cases handled online or by call centres returned a 62.4 % successful contact rate."
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/test-and-trace-lowest-contact-tracing-since-it-began_uk_5f7ee195c5b6a9322e23a3b2?utm_hp_ref=uk-politics
Edit PS - not trying to be rude, just don't have anything useful to say!
What do they say about men with small hands and feet? They have small...
Since it's pretty clear that Boris also has massive Daddy issues (and frankly, who can blame him?), it's hard not to wonder what Dom's excuse is.
In 2019 the UK wasn't even supposed to be in the European Parliament anymore! I didn't want "meaningful work" to be done by our MEPs. What "meaningful work" should they be doing when they should already not have a job?
It was a protest vote to MPs who matter. The MEPs were irrelevant.
Maybe the voters liked the fly.......
More on topic, I think for those of use who are very clear that abortion is immoral and essentially murder, this poses a difficult moral problem.
Banning the use of tissue from current abortions is clearly the right thing to do - especially given the unpleasant actions of various abortion providers to profit from selling said tissue. There is a whole chain of bad incentives which should be stopped. Personally I wouldn't accept any treatment (even life-saving) which I knew had been developed on this basis.
What however should one do about historic stuff? I think there one can perhaps make an case like this:
Imagine my dad is murdered (obviously against my wishes). It's not wrong for me to inherit his money.
It would be wrong if I had my dad murdered (for his money or otherwise).
Taking advantage (as a society) of the historic wrong of aborting a baby in the 70s and using the tissue for medical research is rather like my first example. Using current tissue is for our society much nearer the latter.
All that said, I think I'd hesitate to accept any treatment I knew to have been developed via abortion procured tissue.
That said, it's difficult to know what treatments have been developed in this way. I doubt Trump knew at the time (I'm much better informed than the average person on this, but I suspect I'd find some nasty surprises if I had more time to go looking), so coming back at him for a Gotcha moment seems pretty unfair.
I actually approve this usage, as a clear case of elision.
The un-elided phrase is clearly "I could care less, but it would be a great effort to do so".
If you require them all to be specifically spelt out in the manifesto rather than a very clear coverall then that implies the Conservative leavers will be happy with the EU retaining control of all tax and spending and EU legislation that hasn't been specifically mentioned in the manifesto.
I'm sure that isn't the case.
If you are happy with the EU retaining control over state subsidies (or otherwise, remember the EU is general against them [in theory anyway] so could stop a subsidy), then what other money matters and laws, not specifically mentioned in the Tory manifesto, are you happy for the EU to control? Presumably all of them.
That makes no sense.
Trump saying terrible things may, strictly, be a finite resource, but only in the same way that solar energy is strictly a finite resource. There will be no shortage in our lifetimes.
But expertise of any kind is not valued. So we have government by morons.