Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Almost of as if Johnson's government has wanted No Deal all along.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
Presumably you think Germany would be better off outside the EU, and if not, why not?
Germany controls the EU. They run it and they run the Euro. The EU doesn't do anything Germany doesn't want to do.
That's not been the case with the UK since before German Unification.
They have a significant influence but they don't control it by any means. If they did then decision making would be a lot faster than you complain about.
Fair point!
Germany has more influence though. And the point that the EU doesn't do what Germany doesn't want to do stands. Which yes leaves the EU sclerotic because they don't do what Germany doesn't want, but they don't necessarily do what they do want.
For over thirty years now though the EU bypassed the UK's objections. If Germany didn't want something to happen they didn't do it, if we didn't we got an "opt out" and they went ahead and did it anyway.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
Presumably you think Germany would be better off outside the EU, and if not, why not?
Germany controls the EU. They run it and they run the Euro. The EU doesn't do anything Germany doesn't want to do.
That's not been the case with the UK since before German Unification.
So does that make Germany a "slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution"?
No. It makes it a part of one though yes.
Less damaging for them though as it is slow moving in a direction they and the French set the course of.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
And the Scots wanting to know what petty, childish, arbitrary reason is being adduced by the Tory governm,ent in London why their fellow No to Brexit voting nation in the UK gets to stay in the EU but they don't.
Spitfires and 'This Island Story' don't cut it any more.
Scotland is part of mainland GB, it does not have a land border with another EU nation like Northern Ireland has with the Republic of Ireland and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum so will be treated the same as the rest of GB. Tough.
Otherwise you may as well allow Remain voting London, Tunbridge Wells, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Harrogate, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge, Manchester and Liverpool, Bristol, Winchester and Lewes and Brighton etc to also stay in the SM and CU. Where would it stop?
Indeed, where will it stop?
Your party really has restarted the disintegration of the United Kingdom that was on hold before.
Scottish Indy must be another million to one shot?
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
Presumably you think Germany would be better off outside the EU, and if not, why not?
Germany controls the EU. They run it and they run the Euro. The EU doesn't do anything Germany doesn't want to do.
That's not been the case with the UK since before German Unification.
Is there any way we could subcontract the government of the UK to the Germans?
They seem to better at that type of thing than we are.
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
You wrote 'Would you care to provide any evidence whatsoever that any hedge fund made money out of influencing the referendum result?'
I've provided evidence Odey substantially backed and directly benefited from the outcome. What he lost in other 'informed bets' is not relevant.
No, you've shown that:
(a) Odey backed Vote Leave, which of course I knew
(b) That the nominal value of his bearish fund increased on the day after the referendum, when stocks fell, which is true.
You haven't shown the slightest connection between the two - are you seriously arguing that he backed Vote Leave not because he believed that Brexit was a good thing, but because he hoped that if it were to win, share prices would temporarily fall and he could make money by betting on that outcome?
It's batshit-crazy as a conspiracy theory, isn't it? Especially since there's no evidence that he did bet on the outcome any more than he was betting before (and after) on markets falling; it's been his consistent theme for several years.
But let's assume it's right. For the sake of argument we'll assume he engineered a share-price fall. Unfortunately, at least for himself and his investors, in his delight he seems to have forgotten to close his position, so the fund lost it all again (and more) when prices rapidly adjusted. No money was made by him on it, so he didn't benefit from it. In fact he doubled down and lost more by betting on continuing price falls:
I agree it is difficult to directly link Crispin's donation and his subsequent (unrealised) profit making. All I can do is infer that his timely donation of £14 million to the Leave campaign had a direct influence on the outcome of the referendum. This donation was a substantial amount of the Leave funding and must have helped the campaign reach many potential voters.
I cannot say he directly engineered the share price fall, only that he played his part as did the other money men.
His lack of profit taking IMO does not excuse his influence on the campaign. We have to infer he believed that share values would continue to decline as the full Brexit dividend was realised and thus he doubled down on his previous bets.
So yes as of your previous question: Crispin attempted to make money out of the referendum result. And he tried to influence the result by providing Leave with ~£14 million. Yes, Its tricky to say he conspired to make money from his influence. But he would be a very incompetent fund manager if he had not realised the influence his donation could have on the markets.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
Presumably you think Germany would be better off outside the EU, and if not, why not?
Germany controls the EU. They run it and they run the Euro. The EU doesn't do anything Germany doesn't want to do.
That's not been the case with the UK since before German Unification.
They have a significant influence but they don't control it by any means. If they did then decision making would be a lot faster than you complain about.
Fair point!
Germany has more influence though. And the point that the EU doesn't do what Germany doesn't want to do stands. Which yes leaves the EU sclerotic because they don't do what Germany doesn't want, but they don't necessarily do what they do want.
For over thirty years now though the EU bypassed the UK's objections. If Germany didn't want something to happen they didn't do it, if we didn't we got an "opt out" and they went ahead and did it anyway.
You truly are a scholar and a gentleman, Philip Thompson.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
Presumably you think Germany would be better off outside the EU, and if not, why not?
Germany controls the EU. They run it and they run the Euro. The EU doesn't do anything Germany doesn't want to do.
That's not been the case with the UK since before German Unification.
So does that make Germany a "slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution"?
The EU is a "sclerotic" faceless unaccountable bureaucracy doing with red tape and diktats what Hitler tried and failed to do with tanks and planes - bend and subjugate us to the Teutonic will.
This is quite a common view in places. You'd be surprised. I always am.
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
Even so, why is Labour not well ahead as no deal looms in 20 days time
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Almost of as if Johnson's government has wanted No Deal all along.
Who would have thought it...
That is tweet no. 4:
"The second school of thought, is that Johnson negotiated in bad faith throughout. That his aim was always No Deal and he simply strung 27 countries along, at the expense of a huge amount of work, effort and expense. This makes them not want to do business with this government."
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the ihighest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
And the Scots wanting to know what petty, childish, arbitrary reason is being adduced by the Tory governm,ent in London why their fellow No to Brexit voting nation in the UK gets to stay in the EU but they don't.
Spitfires and 'This Island Story' don't cut it any more.
Scotland is part of mainland GB, it does not have a land border with another EU nation like Northern Ireland has with the Republic of Ireland and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum so will be treated the same as the rest of GB. Tough.
Otherwise you may as well allow Remain voting London, Tunbridge Wells, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Harrogate, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge, Manchester and Liverpool, Bristol, Winchester and Lewes and Brighton etc to also stay in the SM and CU. Where would it stop?
Indeed, where will it stop?
Your party really has restarted the disintegration of the United Kingdom that was on hold before.
It hasn't, Yes to Scottish independence got 45% in 2014 pre Brexit and the SNP got 50% at the 2015 general election in Scotland before the Brexit vote, the SNP got only 45% last year in Scotland at the general election after the Brexit vote.
Plaid got 12% at the 2015 general election in Wales before the Brexit vote, Plaid got only 9% at the general election in Wales last year after the Brexit vote.
Sinn Fein got 24% in Northern Ireland at the 2015 general election before the Brexit vote, Sinn Fein got only 22% at the general election last year in Northern Ireland after the Brexit vote.
What do you call a border down the Irish Sea? Gluing the UK together with Gorilla* Glue?
The Northern Ireland protocol ensures no hard border in Ireland protecting the GFA and minimises checks in the Irish Sea that is what, there is no mood in Northern Ireland for a united Ireland as the below 2020 post Brexit poll shows
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the ihighest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
And the Scots wanting to know what petty, childish, arbitrary reason is being adduced by the Tory governm,ent in London why their fellow No to Brexit voting nation in the UK gets to stay in the EU but they don't.
Spitfires and 'This Island Story' don't cut it any more.
Scotland is part of mainland GB, it does not have a land border with another EU nation like Northern Ireland has with the Republic of Ireland and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum so will be treated the same as the rest of GB. Tough.
Otherwise you may as well allow Remain voting London, Tunbridge Wells, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Harrogate, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge, Manchester and Liverpool, Bristol, Winchester and Lewes and Brighton etc to also stay in the SM and CU. Where would it stop?
Indeed, where will it stop?
Your party really has restarted the disintegration of the United Kingdom that was on hold before.
It hasn't, Yes to Scottish independence got 45% in 2014 pre Brexit and the SNP got 50% at the 2015 general election in Scotland before Brexit, only 45% last year in Scotland at the general election after the Brexit vote.
Plaid got 12% at the 2015 general election in Wales before the Brexit vote, Plaid got only 9% at the general election in Wales last year after the Brexit vote.
Sinn Fein got 24% in Northern Ireland at the 2015 general election before the Brexit vote, only 22% at the general election last year in Northern Ireland after the Brexit vote.
As we all know, historical trends are a sure fire indicator of future performance.
The point he made was Brexit by itself had boosted Celtic nationalism and threatened the UK, in fact the nationalist parties have seen their support decline after the Brexit vote
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the ihighest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
And the Scots wanting to know what petty, childish, arbitrary reason is being adduced by the Tory governm,ent in London why their fellow No to Brexit voting nation in the UK gets to stay in the EU but they don't.
Spitfires and 'This Island Story' don't cut it any more.
Scotland is part of mainland GB, it does not have a land border with another EU nation like Northern Ireland has with the Republic of Ireland and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum so will be treated the same as the rest of GB. Tough.
Otherwise you may as well allow Remain voting London, Tunbridge Wells, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Harrogate, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge, Manchester and Liverpool, Bristol, Winchester and Lewes and Brighton etc to also stay in the SM and CU. Where would it stop?
Indeed, where will it stop?
Your party really has restarted the disintegration of the United Kingdom that was on hold before.
It hasn't, Yes to Scottish independence got 45% in 2014 pre Brexit and the SNP got 50% at the 2015 general election in Scotland before the Brexit vote, the SNP got only 45% last year in Scotland at the general election after the Brexit vote.
Plaid got 12% at the 2015 general election in Wales before the Brexit vote, Plaid got only 9% at the general election in Wales last year after the Brexit vote.
Sinn Fein got 24% in Northern Ireland at the 2015 general election before the Brexit vote, Sinn Fein got only 22% at the general election last year in Northern Ireland after the Brexit vote.
What do you call a border down the Irish Sea? Gluing the UK together with Gorilla* Glue?
The Northern Ireland protocol ensures no hard border in Ireland protecting the GFA and minimises checks in the Irish Sea that is what, there is no mood in Northern Ireland for a united Ireland as the below 2020 post Brexit poll shows
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Yep, shafting the ERG the same way he shafted the DUP would be a great way of uniting most of the country behind him.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Almost of as if Johnson's government has wanted No Deal all along.
Who would have thought it...
That is tweet no. 4:
"The second school of thought, is that Johnson negotiated in bad faith throughout. That his aim was always No Deal and he simply strung 27 countries along, at the expense of a huge amount of work, effort and expense. This makes them not want to do business with this government."
Which is another point of comparison with Trump. Both Trump and Bozo are going to leave their countries with a legacy of trashed reputation that will take a long time to repair.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the ihighest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
And the Scots wanting to know what petty, childish, arbitrary reason is being adduced by the Tory governm,ent in London why their fellow No to Brexit voting nation in the UK gets to stay in the EU but they don't.
Spitfires and 'This Island Story' don't cut it any more.
Scotland is part of mainland GB, it does not have a land border with another EU nation like Northern Ireland has with the Republic of Ireland and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum so will be treated the same as the rest of GB. Tough.
Otherwise you may as well allow Remain voting London, Tunbridge Wells, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Harrogate, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge, Manchester and Liverpool, Bristol, Winchester and Lewes and Brighton etc to also stay in the SM and CU. Where would it stop?
Indeed, where will it stop?
Your party really has restarted the disintegration of the United Kingdom that was on hold before.
It hasn't, Yes to Scottish independence got 45% in 2014 pre Brexit and the SNP got 50% at the 2015 general election in Scotland before Brexit, only 45% last year in Scotland at the general election after the Brexit vote.
Plaid got 12% at the 2015 general election in Wales before the Brexit vote, Plaid got only 9% at the general election in Wales last year after the Brexit vote.
Sinn Fein got 24% in Northern Ireland at the 2015 general election before the Brexit vote, only 22% at the general election last year in Northern Ireland after the Brexit vote.
As we all know, historical trends are a sure fire indicator of future performance.
The point he made was Brexit by itself had boosted Celtic nationalism and threatened the UK, in fact the nationalist parties have seen their support decline after the Brexit vote
Funny that independence support has gone up in Scotland. Could you just possibly be cherrypicking your surveys?
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Almost of as if Johnson's government has wanted No Deal all along.
Who would have thought it...
That is tweet no. 4:
"The second school of thought, is that Johnson negotiated in bad faith throughout. That his aim was always No Deal and he simply strung 27 countries along, at the expense of a huge amount of work, effort and expense. This makes them not want to do business with this government."
Which is another point of comparison with Trump. Both Trump and Bozo are going to leave their countries with a legacy of trashed reputation that will take a long time to repair.
It won't be instant but I think that a change of government can repair things quite fast. While admittedly Italy is not held up as being a paragon of good governance, it is no longer the laughing stock it was when Burlesconi was in charge. Similarly global approval ratings for the US shot up when Obama took over from W - although that was more symbolic than anything.
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
Even so, why is Labour not well ahead as no deal looms in 20 days time
There's almost a suspension of politics at the moment.
Labour are a little against, but mostly supportive.
This is a good decision on the part of Labour. It's perhaps mostly inadvertent, in that they really can't find a good different policy.
Events dear boy events - that's our politics for the next couple of weeks - then the fight resumes.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the ihighest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
And the Scots wanting to know what petty, childish, arbitrary reason is being adduced by the Tory governm,ent in London why their fellow No to Brexit voting nation in the UK gets to stay in the EU but they don't.
Spitfires and 'This Island Story' don't cut it any more.
Scotland is part of mainland GB, it does not have a land border with another EU nation like Northern Ireland has with the Republic of Ireland and Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum so will be treated the same as the rest of GB. Tough.
Otherwise you may as well allow Remain voting London, Tunbridge Wells, Esher and Walton, Guildford, Harrogate, Cardiff, Oxford and Cambridge, Manchester and Liverpool, Bristol, Winchester and Lewes and Brighton etc to also stay in the SM and CU. Where would it stop?
Indeed, where will it stop?
Your party really has restarted the disintegration of the United Kingdom that was on hold before.
It hasn't, Yes to Scottish independence got 45% in 2014 pre Brexit and the SNP got 50% at the 2015 general election in Scotland before the Brexit vote, the SNP got only 45% last year in Scotland at the general election after the Brexit vote.
Plaid got 12% at the 2015 general election in Wales before the Brexit vote, Plaid got only 9% at the general election in Wales last year after the Brexit vote.
Sinn Fein got 24% in Northern Ireland at the 2015 general election before the Brexit vote, Sinn Fein got only 22% at the general election last year in Northern Ireland after the Brexit vote.
What do you call a border down the Irish Sea? Gluing the UK together with Gorilla* Glue?
The Northern Ireland protocol ensures no hard border in Ireland protecting the GFA and minimises checks in the Irish Sea that is what, there is no mood in Northern Ireland for a united Ireland as the below 2020 post Brexit poll shows
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
I think that's correct. But it means also that in more remainery Torydom, West Kent, Surrey etc, he risks losing people to the LD's now that voting that way no longer risks letting Big Bad Corbyn in through the back door.
Ok. So iyo a No Deal probably damages the Tory party for the next election but helps HIM - Johnson - in the shorter term.
Given my judgement of him is that (i) unlike May and Cameron he cares only about himself with the party a mere vehicle and (ii) he does short term tactics not long term strategy, this means he will No Deal.
Food for thought pour moi. Should I change my long-time made-up mind on this?
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
Presumably you think Germany would be better off outside the EU, and if not, why not?
Germany controls the EU. They run it and they run the Euro. The EU doesn't do anything Germany doesn't want to do.
That's not been the case with the UK since before German Unification.
So does that make Germany a "slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution"?
The EU is a "sclerotic" faceless unaccountable bureaucracy doing with red tape and diktats what Hitler tried and failed to do with tanks and planes - bend and subjugate us to the Teutonic will.
This is quite a common view in places. You'd be surprised. I always am.
You were doing so well with your first seven words.
Then you changed it into a pantomime and it all went absurd.
I can't think of a single person ever to express such thoughts. Partially because they are two opposing viewpoints you've mashed together.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
Local and devolved parliament elections, of course. 6 months, actually less.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
True. But Johnson is in a far stronger position than May and she staggered on for two years after the 2017 GE fiasco. The only way that he's in danger is if the Tory Party splits along protectionist and internationalist lines a la the Peelite split in the mid-19th Century and its the 1859 election redux. I don't think that is very likely - but we live in extraordinary times.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
I think most of the parliamentary party will rally behind Boris and his deal. They've got their careers to think about and where's the mileage in getting bogged down in Brexit all over again? The whole issue really has been sucked dry.
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
Even so, why is Labour not well ahead as no deal looms in 20 days time
There's almost a suspension of politics at the moment.
Labour are a little against, but mostly supportive.
This is a good decision on the part of Labour. It's perhaps mostly inadvertent, in that they really can't find a good different policy.
Events dear boy events - that's our politics for the next couple of weeks - then the fight resumes.
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
No, the current offer to the UK is this. It's a deal in which IF we continue to align, we get full access to their market in goods without tariffs etc, and they get full access to continue to sell twice that volume of goods to our market without tariffs etc. IF, in future, THEY choose to change their rules so that we diverge, THEY can choose to limit access or put up (some) tariffs at THEIR discretion, while they will still continue to enjoy tariff-free access to our market.
Meanwhile, if WE choose to change our rules to require higher standards, even higher than the already much lower minimum standards often in place within the EU, then we can't limit access or put up (some) tariffs at OUR discretion.
Their proposals are totally one-sided and really do amount to something that only a vassal state would sign up to.
I think most of the parliamentary party will rally behind Boris and his deal. They've got their careers to think about and where's the mileage in getting bogged down in Brexit all over again? The whole issue really has been sucked dry.
The question is whether they will rally behind his No Deal though
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
How?
By the same people who were freaking out about Brexit before the last election continuing to do so?
Criticism by someone who voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019 would be more meaningful. Don't see any of that though.
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Almost of as if Johnson's government has wanted No Deal all along.
Who would have thought it...
That is tweet no. 4:
"The second school of thought, is that Johnson negotiated in bad faith throughout. That his aim was always No Deal and he simply strung 27 countries along, at the expense of a huge amount of work, effort and expense. This makes them not want to do business with this government."
Which is another point of comparison with Trump. Both Trump and Bozo are going to leave their countries with a legacy of trashed reputation that will take a long time to repair.
It won't be instant but I think that a change of government can repair things quite fast. While admittedly Italy is not held up as being a paragon of good governance, it is no longer the laughing stock it was when Burlesconi was in charge. Similarly global approval ratings for the US shot up when Obama took over from W - although that was more symbolic than anything.
It’s an enviable position to be in. Biden will take office accompanied by enormous goodwill from the rest of the world (Russia excepted, of course). Similarly, a Starmer-led government would be welcomed with open arms by the EU.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
The same accusation of bad faith negotiation could easily be levelled at the EU. Plenty of insistence on petty stuff that as former long time member and supposed close friends was unnecessary and nothing to do with core EU platform / doesn't break their red lines in terms of a single market.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
98% chance of No Deal.
When the clown came out with his "million to one" spiel, if only someone had offered to take the bet
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
Even so, why is Labour not well ahead as no deal looms in 20 days time
There's almost a suspension of politics at the moment.
Labour are a little against, but mostly supportive.
This is a good decision on the part of Labour. It's perhaps mostly inadvertent, in that they really can't find a good different policy.
Events dear boy events - that's our politics for the next couple of weeks - then the fight resumes.
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake"
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
Take the deal boris. It's not permanent. Weve spent decades in the EU house, 2 years in the porch. I dont mind spending a few years in the garden before getting out the gate if it avoids costly chaos. Brexit is a process, not an event.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
I think most of the parliamentary party will rally behind Boris and his deal. They've got their careers to think about and where's the mileage in getting bogged down in Brexit all over again? The whole issue really has been sucked dry.
The question is whether they will rally behind his No Deal though
No, I think No Deal will prove sheer poison. Every Tory MP will be scared witless about his seat in that event, and they'd probably end up making Boris a human sacrifice to the electorate.
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
Take the deal boris. It's not permanent. Weve spent decades in the EU house, 2 years in the porch. I dont mind spending a few years in the garden before getting out the gate if it avoids costly chaos. Brexit is a process, not an event.
That's just not credible, and if the EU believe it they are absolute cretins. Boris was riding high early in the year and has a huge majority, if he didn't want a deal he didn't need to string anyone along. Added to that, it would be an awful lot of work to pretend to want a deal this whole time, and does putting in that effort sound like Boris to you?
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
How?
By the same people who were freaking out about Brexit before the last election continuing to do so?
Criticism by someone who voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019 would be more meaningful. Don't see any of that though.
If you weren't so busy shouting, you might have noticed that the more thoughtful and intelligent posters who did exactly that have either faded out, or throttled back their brexit commentary in favour of other topics over the past year. If that is not a milestone on their journey to conceding that they and Johnson were wrong, it is at least a clue that they won't be rushing to the polls in May to put a cross in the Tory box.
No, I think No Deal will prove sheer poison. Every Tory MP will be scared witless about his seat in that event, and they'd probably end up making Boris a human sacrifice to the electorate.
I agree with you, but the headbangers are still cheering him on to do it...
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK?
That's a fair assumption; it took them nearly 30 years to address fish discards, and there is still 110 million Euro being spent every year shuffling the EU Parliament to Strasburg and back every month.
Shadow Education Secretary wants to rebrand the honours system and abolish private schools but recognises the latter would not be a top priority for a future Labour government https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55278454
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
How?
By the same people who were freaking out about Brexit before the last election continuing to do so?
Criticism by someone who voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019 would be more meaningful. Don't see any of that though.
If you weren't so busy shouting, you might have noticed that the more thoughtful and intelligent posters who did exactly that have either faded out, or throttled back their brexit commentary in favour of other topics over the past year. If that is not a milestone on their journey to conceding that they and Johnson were wrong, it is at least a clue that they won't be rushing to the polls in May to put a cross in the Tory box.
I don't think so. Most thoughtful and intelligent posters I see who did both don't want the government to sign a deal along the lines of what the Times described last night.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
How?
By the same people who were freaking out about Brexit before the last election continuing to do so?
Criticism by someone who voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019 would be more meaningful. Don't see any of that though.
If you weren't so busy shouting, you might have noticed that the more thoughtful and intelligent posters who did exactly that have either faded out, or throttled back their brexit commentary in favour of other topics over the past year. If that is not a milestone on their journey to conceding that they and Johnson were wrong, it is at least a clue that they won't be rushing to the polls in May to put a cross in the Tory box.
May is a long time away in terms of covid and brexit
You may be right but expecting the unexpected in this volatile political climate would be prudent
And Labour in Wales may have a fight on their hands
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
Even so, why is Labour not well ahead as no deal looms in 20 days time
There's almost a suspension of politics at the moment.
Labour are a little against, but mostly supportive.
This is a good decision on the part of Labour. It's perhaps mostly inadvertent, in that they really can't find a good different policy.
Events dear boy events - that's our politics for the next couple of weeks - then the fight resumes.
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake"
And why interrupt two enemies. (Omnium 2020 TM - all rights reserved)
It`s about mitigating risk not removing it. Access to loved ones is desperately needed after ten months of misery. And the risk to residents is more from carers than from visitors.
That's just not credible, and if the EU believe it they are absolute cretins. Boris was riding high early in the year and has a huge majority, if he didn't want a deal he didn't need to string anyone along. Added to that, it would be an awful lot of work to pretend to want a deal this whole time, and does putting in that effort sound like Boris to you?
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
When people see malice 999 out of 999 it's actually due to incompetence.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
‘There were useless Tories before the clown’ shocker
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Aren't they missing the bit about when the EU diverges, the UK has to follow suit or else?
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
‘There were useless Tories before the clown’ shocker
Absolutely. Boris is infinitely better than May.
Truss, Gove, Sunak etc are a far superior cabinet too.
That's just not credible, and if the EU believe it they are absolute cretins. Boris was riding high early in the year and has a huge majority, if he didn't want a deal he didn't need to string anyone along. Added to that, it would be an awful lot of work to pretend to want a deal this whole time, and does putting in that effort sound like Boris to you?
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
Sounds extremely credible. His chief advisor and the architect of Brexit was known to be dead against a deal but Boris knew he would would lose the election if he let it be known he wanted 'no deal' (not to mention that he would have been regailed with 'Oven Ready and the rest of his inanities during the campaign). You don't need to be a 'mastermind' just a simple liar. Fits like a glove.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
How?
By the same people who were freaking out about Brexit before the last election continuing to do so?
Criticism by someone who voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019 would be more meaningful. Don't see any of that though.
If you weren't so busy shouting, you might have noticed that the more thoughtful and intelligent posters who did exactly that have either faded out, or throttled back their brexit commentary in favour of other topics over the past year. If that is not a milestone on their journey to conceding that they and Johnson were wrong, it is at least a clue that they won't be rushing to the polls in May to put a cross in the Tory box.
I don't think so. Most thoughtful and intelligent posters I see who did both don't want the government to sign a deal along the lines of what the Times described last night.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Until the next GE the public don't matter. The Parliamentary Party can get rid of him but we can't.
We can give the Parliamentary Party a pretty big hint.
Local and devolved parliament elections, of course. 6 months, actually less.
It's going to be a strange time. I heard that many places are going to need to spread their counts over 2-3 days to keep everything within restritions that are likely to be in place. And done once, albeit for good reason, it might be the end of night counting (it's already not universal) for locals. And if you cannot see some fossilised councillor kicked out at 3am, it's hardly worth following.
This forum is as polarised as ever and recent polling seems to indicate little advantage to either the two main parties
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
COVID Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern. Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
Even so, why is Labour not well ahead as no deal looms in 20 days time
Because a large proportion of the electorate actively relish that. Add a few more who don't want No Deal, but unnaccountably continue to enable it, and the Tory floor stays at c 38%. When one Party polls at that level, the other can't be "well ahead." Whatever they do or don't do.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Absolutely. That's my view and has been from the get go. No Deal is not a real option. It's a complete nonsense. But what I'm doing today is subjecting it to one of my brutal self-audits that I do periodically on stuff I'm convinced about. I'm right in the middle of it so will report back tomorrow or at the latest over the weekend.
Hope you and everyone else can stand the tension for that long.
Ok. But he must think we his people will love it too. Or at least that most of his Leaver base plus a fair chunk of others will.
Do you think he genuinely believes that?
He was elected PM with a huge majority. Why would he not think his people love him?
Yes. But he rushed a "deal" through last year - his WA - because he needed it for the election. He knew that running on a No Deal ticket would not have had the same appeal, might not even have won.
So, no, I'm not convinced.
The only reason I can think of why he won't do a deal is that he fears his Hard Leave MP faction would rebel and he'd be forced to rely on Labour votes, look weak, disappoint the grass roots, put his position in jeopardy.
If so, I can see the rationale from his PoV to go for the WTO crash out.
No Deal defies all logic for Boris. What the Euro-sceptic Tory Right thinks about the matter is irrelevant. Are the Leave-inclined members of the public really going to side with the likes of Spock and IDS over Boris? Not a chance. If Boris proclaims it's a great deal then that'll be enough. Any leakage to Farage will be negligible. No Deal, in comparison, will see the entire country up in arms, with Boris probably hounded from office in ignominy. I can't see Boris allowing that to happen.
Absolutely. That's my view and has been from the get go. No Deal is not a real option. It's a complete nonsense. But what I'm doing today is subjecting it to one of my brutal self-audits that I do periodically on stuff I'm convinced about. I'm right in the middle of it so will report back tomorrow or at the latest over the weekend.
Hope you and everyone else can stand the tension for that long.
That's just not credible, and if the EU believe it they are absolute cretins. Boris was riding high early in the year and has a huge majority, if he didn't want a deal he didn't need to string anyone along. Added to that, it would be an awful lot of work to pretend to want a deal this whole time, and does putting in that effort sound like Boris to you?
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
Sounds extremely credible. His chief advisor and the architect of Brexit was known to be dead against a deal but Boris knew he would would lose the election if he let it be known he wanted 'no deal' (not to mention that he would have been regailed with 'Oven Ready and the rest of his inanities during the campaign). You don't need to be a 'mastermind' just a simple liar. Fits like a glove.
You're hatred is blinding you and insisting there must be malevolence. It isn't being 'a simple liar', it would require massive amounts of effort, even on his own part, across much of a year at the least. He could have made a bunch of impossible demands that essentially led to immediate no deal in the first few months, whilst pretending he wanted a deal, if that was his intention, and would give him many more months to prepare the ground for no deal he wanted.
So the proposition requires a lot more than being a simple liar, it requires him also to work a lot harder for no deal, whilst making handling no deal much harder for himself. If we consider Boris is self interested more than anything else, why on earth would he do that?
The far simpler explanation is that he does want a deal, but his desires, and the requirements of the EU, have made it hard to reach one. And that doesn't require any praise of him, but the sinister scenario just doesn't hold up given how much it requires him to have done.
Everyone at the Commission is quite confused. The current offer to the UK is a deal in which IF we align, we get full access. IF, in future, we diverge they limit access or put up (some) tariffs. The UK choosing to go to NO access and FULL tariffs NOW, is incomprehensible.
Aren't they missing the bit about when the EU diverges, the UK has to follow suit or else?
Even worse reportedly the lopsided nature of the deal meaning the EU can sanction the UK but the UK can't reciprocate. Reciprocity is key.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
Right, so in other words, the UK had exactly as much time to prepare as the EU did but chose not to do so. That is not the same as saying "They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year."
That's just not credible, and if the EU believe it they are absolute cretins. Boris was riding high early in the year and has a huge majority, if he didn't want a deal he didn't need to string anyone along. Added to that, it would be an awful lot of work to pretend to want a deal this whole time, and does putting in that effort sound like Boris to you?
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
Not saying I cred it but it is credible. He would not have said early on that he wanted No Deal because he won the election on the basis of getting one. Much of his rhetoric when seeking our votes was along those lines.
Sovereignty fans. What's your view of this text that requires the UK to go to war at the whim of another country, normally a sovereign prerogative of a nation state, if that country is attacked even when the attack does not affect the UK?
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
‘There were useless Tories before the clown’ shocker
Quite possibly, Northern Ireland is staying in the single market and customs union effectively while also being assured of having minimal checks on goods going to and from GB, so if we go to No Deal Northern Ireland may see the highest growth rate not only in the UK but Europe as a whole.
You are one of my key sources on this quest I'm on to work out WHY Johnson will No Deal if he does.
The Tory Party. He can't do any LPF deal because many of his MPs would rebel and he'd be relying on Labour votes and losing the grass roots and putting his position in peril.
How does that sound to you as a thought?
If he does do a Deal yes the ERG will vote against and some Red Wall Tory voting Leavers will go to Farage, if he doesn't do a deal then as Doug Seal states the Tories will get wiped out in most of London next May by Starmer Labour and in much of the Home Counties by the LDs
Right. Thanks. Immediate grief with ERG and Hard Leavers if he Deals, or slower burning but probably deeper grief with moderate floaters if he No Deals.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
75%
Cheers thanks. That would make No Deal the clear bet at the current 1.74.
A great bet, actually, since it pays even if there is a deal but it isn't signed by y/end.
That's just not credible, and if the EU believe it they are absolute cretins. Boris was riding high early in the year and has a huge majority, if he didn't want a deal he didn't need to string anyone along. Added to that, it would be an awful lot of work to pretend to want a deal this whole time, and does putting in that effort sound like Boris to you?
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
Not saying I cred it but it is credible. He would not have said early on that he wanted No Deal because he won the election on the basis of getting one. Much of his rhetoric when seeking our votes was along those lines.
All he'd have had to do was make a bunch of impossible demands early on, which the EU would reject, and then say he was leaving the door open for them to be reasonable. He was so high in the polls he'd have gotten away with it, too.
Another factor is the stringing things out to this extent. Even if he has been faking it this whole time, why keep the pretence going right into mid December? I think having 'tried' for 9 months, things could have been 'reluctantly' called off due to EU 'intransigence' in, say, October, with him being able to maintain plausible deniability he gave it his best shot. Instead, he is still personally now making entreaties to EU leaders and jetting off to Brussells (enabling oh so hilarious jokes about him being a supplicant). Really, just why?
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
Right, so in other words, the UK had exactly as much time to prepare as the EU did but chose not to do so. That is not the same as saying "They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year."
Yes.
The UK had four years to prepare but May and the Remainer 2017-19 Parliament combined to piss away three of those.
We have only had the current government and current Parliament for 12 months. And the preparations now have been done in those twelve months.
I don't consider May and Hammond to be a part of we anymore than you might consider Boris to be we. Different government that I opposed and a different Parliament.
One thing that is remarkable during this negotiation is just how afraid the EU clearly are.
They're scared of their unity being divided by conversations.
They're scared a free UK will out compete them.
Considering what an epic own goal the UK supposedly made with Brexit, why is Europe so lacking in confidence in dealing with us?
Makes me all the more confident that we should do what they're afraid of and walk away.
Assuming that the EU is very afraid of us walking away, why do you think it is that they're apparently holding their negotiating line and not making major concessions?
Because they're too sclerotic to make decisions. There are no decision makers in the room. That is a deep part of what is wrong with the institution.
But consider this.
The EU has lots of deals with various countries, with other nations happy to talk to them as well.
I know it's not your view of how the world works, or should work...
... but is it possible that they know what they're doing, and that the EU approach (set out your broad stall very clearly early on and subsequently insulate the negotiators from the politicians as much as possible) is an effective way of doing things?
No. The EU is sliding backwards when it comes to deals agreed globally.
Even the EFTA has more deals agreed than the EU does - and every single EFTA nation has a superior GDP per capita to the EU. The EU is a slow moving, sclerotic, failing institution. Failure to reach a deal with them while reaching dozens with the rest of the globe is symptomatic of their malaise.
I like the word sclerotic - but not enough to read it seemingly dozens of times a day as I read the threads. Everybody knows by now what you think of the EU - some agree with you, some don't. But do you really need to repeat it so often? I ask courteously.
Yes I do. Because it's a good word that describes the EU well and answered the direct question that Stuart asked me. Stuart asked a question and I provided an answer, that is how conversations progress.
So much so that they got their response to Brexit in place well before we had even started to think about it, and have been way better prepared than we are for a long time now. The contrast in maturity and competence between their leading figures and our own top politicians is embarrassing for us whenever they appear together.
They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
Ah, so the EU is in a different time-space continuum than the UK? Did Dom accelerate the island to a significant fraction of c or something?
No. Hammond refused to fund preparations, May didn't get on with or insist upon preparations, Fox chose to engage in vanity trips taking to the USA etc rather than rolling over our established deals. Meanwhile the EU got on with the fundamentals while we had a national psychodrama that only ended in December last year when Boris won a majority.
Right, so in other words, the UK had exactly as much time to prepare as the EU did but chose not to do so. That is not the same as saying "They've had four years to prepare, we've only had just a year."
Yes.
The UK had four years to prepare but May and the Remainer 2017-19 Parliament combined to piss away three of those.
We have only had the current government and current Parliament for 12 months. And the preparations now have been done in those twelve months.
I don't consider May and Hammond to be a part of we anymore than you might consider Boris to be we. Different government that I opposed and a different Parliament.
You guys are just shameless in your blaming of others, for everything.
You wrote 'Would you care to provide any evidence whatsoever that any hedge fund made money out of influencing the referendum result?'
I've provided evidence Odey substantially backed and directly benefited from the outcome. What he lost in other 'informed bets' is not relevant.
No, you've shown that:
(a) Odey backed Vote Leave, which of course I knew
(b) That the nominal value of his bearish fund increased on the day after the referendum, when stocks fell, which is true.
You haven't shown the slightest connection between the two - are you seriously arguing that he backed Vote Leave not because he believed that Brexit was a good thing, but because he hoped that if it were to win, share prices would temporarily fall and he could make money by betting on that outcome?
It's batshit-crazy as a conspiracy theory, isn't it? Especially since there's no evidence that he did bet on the outcome any more than he was betting before (and after) on markets falling; it's been his consistent theme for several years.
But let's assume it's right. For the sake of argument we'll assume he engineered a share-price fall. Unfortunately, at least for himself and his investors, in his delight he seems to have forgotten to close his position, so the fund lost it all again (and more) when prices rapidly adjusted. No money was made by him on it, so he didn't benefit from it. In fact he doubled down and lost more by betting on continuing price falls:
I agree it is difficult to directly link Crispin's donation and his subsequent (unrealised) profit making. All I can do is infer that his timely donation of £14 million to the Leave campaign had a direct influence on the outcome of the referendum. This donation was a substantial amount of the Leave funding and must have helped the campaign reach many potential voters.
I cannot say he directly engineered the share price fall, only that he played his part as did the other money men.
His lack of profit taking IMO does not excuse his influence on the campaign. We have to infer he believed that share values would continue to decline as the full Brexit dividend was realised and thus he doubled down on his previous bets.
So yes as of your previous question: Crispin attempted to make money out of the referendum result. And he tried to influence the result by providing Leave with ~£14 million. Yes, Its tricky to say he conspired to make money from his influence. But he would be a very incompetent fund manager if he had not realised the influence his donation could have on the markets.
Isn't 14 milllion around the cost of that uk government decided to invest in the mailshot too persuade people to vote remain? Money forcibly extracted from people via hmrc and used to bolster the remain vote regardless of whether those same voters wanted to vote remain. If you want dishonesty in the referendum funding look no further.
In addition the remain side spent much more on their campaign than the leave camp so obviously money spent doesn't equate that tightly to votes cast else remain would have got double the votes of leave
Comments
The question for those who support Labour is why on earth are they not miles ahead, indeed out of sight in the polls
Starmer is obviously an improvement on Corbyn but lacks something and maybe a lawyer type demeanour does not cut through
Who would have thought it...
Germany has more influence though. And the point that the EU doesn't do what Germany doesn't want to do stands. Which yes leaves the EU sclerotic because they don't do what Germany doesn't want, but they don't necessarily do what they do want.
For over thirty years now though the EU bypassed the UK's objections. If Germany didn't want something to happen they didn't do it, if we didn't we got an "opt out" and they went ahead and did it anyway.
They seem to better at that type of thing than we are.
Starmer is a little low key, which is of mild concern.
Tory vote share still somewhat coupled to the 'Brexit right' polling. Which may be of imminent concern.
I cannot say he directly engineered the share price fall, only that he played his part as did the other money men.
His lack of profit taking IMO does not excuse his influence on the campaign. We have to infer he believed that share values would continue to decline as the full Brexit dividend was realised and thus he doubled down on his previous bets.
So yes as of your previous question: Crispin attempted to make money out of the referendum result. And he tried to influence the result by providing Leave with ~£14 million. Yes, Its tricky to say he conspired to make money from his influence. But he would be a very incompetent fund manager if he had not realised the influence his donation could have on the markets.
This is quite a common view in places. You'd be surprised. I always am.
"The second school of thought, is that Johnson negotiated in bad faith throughout. That his aim was always No Deal and he simply strung 27 countries along, at the expense of a huge amount of work, effort and expense. This makes them not want to do business with this government."
https://www.irishcentral.com/news/politics/northern-ireland-does-not-support-united-ireland-poll
Labour are a little against, but mostly supportive.
This is a good decision on the part of Labour. It's perhaps mostly inadvertent, in that they really can't find a good different policy.
Events dear boy events - that's our politics for the next couple of weeks - then the fight resumes.
Given my judgement of him is that (i) unlike May and Cameron he cares only about himself with the party a mere vehicle and (ii) he does short term tactics not long term strategy, this means he will No Deal.
Food for thought pour moi. Should I change my long-time made-up mind on this?
Hmm.
Then you changed it into a pantomime and it all went absurd.
I can't think of a single person ever to express such thoughts. Partially because they are two opposing viewpoints you've mashed together.
Meanwhile, if WE choose to change our rules to require higher standards, even higher than the already much lower minimum standards often in place within the EU, then we can't limit access or put up (some) tariffs at OUR discretion.
Their proposals are totally one-sided and really do amount to something that only a vassal state would sign up to.
By the same people who were freaking out about Brexit before the last election continuing to do so?
Criticism by someone who voted Leave in 2016 and Tory in 2019 would be more meaningful. Don't see any of that though.
Toughie for our Boris. So, which way does he jump iyo?
No bet or anything, no money or kudos at stake, just tell me what you think please. Maybe give me what you see as the approx % chance of No Deal, right now as we speak.
We are in a far better prepared position than we were twelve months ago. What May, Hammond, Fox and co did while they were in charge is unforgivable. It's a shame May still sits as a Tory MP.
The failure to get a deal, and failure it would be, would be down to competence and competing politics (that 'standing up to Britain' plays well in the EU demonstrates that politics are in play there as much as here when the government stands up 'for' Britain), not machiavellian scheming.
Why people imply Boris is some mastermind I do not know. Does that seem likely?
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1337448576184684545
https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status/1337449333520822274
https://twitter.com/Mendelpol/status/1337449756029759491
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55278454
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55278314
https://twitter.com/JamesCrisp6/status/1337450031054544896?s=20
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1337195587771510784?s=21
You may be right but expecting the unexpected in this volatile political climate would be prudent
And Labour in Wales may have a fight on their hands
Death on the Nile is now set for Sept. 17, 2021.
https://ew.com/movies/free-guy-death-on-the-nile-2021-release-dates/
Truss, Gove, Sunak etc are a far superior cabinet too.
When one Party polls at that level, the other can't be "well ahead." Whatever they do or don't do.
Hope you and everyone else can stand the tension for that long.
Won`t sleep tonight.
So the proposition requires a lot more than being a simple liar, it requires him also to work a lot harder for no deal, whilst making handling no deal much harder for himself. If we consider Boris is self interested more than anything else, why on earth would he do that?
The far simpler explanation is that he does want a deal, but his desires, and the requirements of the EU, have made it hard to reach one. And that doesn't require any praise of him, but the sinister scenario just doesn't hold up given how much it requires him to have done.
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.”
It applies to all parties
Ye who is without sin first cast the stone
A great bet, actually, since it pays even if there is a deal but it isn't signed by y/end.
Hmm.
Another factor is the stringing things out to this extent. Even if he has been faking it this whole time, why keep the pretence going right into mid December? I think having 'tried' for 9 months, things could have been 'reluctantly' called off due to EU 'intransigence' in, say, October, with him being able to maintain plausible deniability he gave it his best shot. Instead, he is still personally now making entreaties to EU leaders and jetting off to Brussells (enabling oh so hilarious jokes about him being a supplicant). Really, just why?
The UK had four years to prepare but May and the Remainer 2017-19 Parliament combined to piss away three of those.
We have only had the current government and current Parliament for 12 months. And the preparations now have been done in those twelve months.
I don't consider May and Hammond to be a part of we anymore than you might consider Boris to be we. Different government that I opposed and a different Parliament.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1337445727308574721?s=20
Take some damn responsibility. For once.
In addition the remain side spent much more on their campaign than the leave camp so obviously money spent doesn't equate that tightly to votes cast else remain would have got double the votes of leave