Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Scots missed. The Parliamentary dynamics of Scottish independence – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited February 14 in General
Scots missed. The Parliamentary dynamics of Scottish independence – politicalbetting.com

The Big Bang Theory has run more than a few seasons past its peak, but one of its more striking moments was Sheldon’s and Amy’s game Counterfactuals. One player had to build a question on a premise and then other players had to come up with, then defend, their answer. For example: “In a world where rhinoceroses are domesticated pets, who wins the Second World War?”  

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited February 14
    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    CNN have turned their customary fire away from Britain and onto the EU. It's a withering attack:

    https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/14/europe/europe-crises-intl-analysis/index.html

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    23/3, real trouble here for England.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Sandpit said:

    23/3, real trouble here for England.

    Are these the same umpires as the last match? Because they’re all having a shocker and yet last match they were superb.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Sandpit said:

    23/3, real trouble here for England.

    Amazed that Ben Stokes took an off stump guard. Is this a new thing in cricket? I've never seen it before.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 29,456
    Don’t think this game will reach four days...
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited February 14
    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    Question is whether the Indians would enforce a follow on should England fail to reach 129. My take is that they should not. Instead try to hammer out 200.

    The only hope I think here is for Ben Stokes to go into one-day mode. An all-out assault on the spin bowlers in an attempt to carve out fast runs. It's what Rohit and Pant did so brilliantly: attack as the best form of defence on a pitch like this.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    What a difference a week makes. Last week we had a pitch that was good for three days, three umpires who did well and an England team on top.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998

    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
    Biden’s going to struggle to reunite the country with hyper-partisans like Pelosi around.

    The whole thing was just political theatre, the Dems should have known they’d struggle to tie Trump directly to the Capitol tilts, in the eyes of sufficient numbers of Republican Senators.

    As you say, they should have just ignored it and left a very split GOP.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 29,456
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    What a difference a week makes. Last week we had a pitch that was good for three days, three umpires who did well and an England team on top.
    This pitch looks good for about three days...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,294
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
    I completely disagree.
    Surely the point wasn't to achieve a guilty verdict but to make the Republican senators dip their hands in the blood.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    What a difference a week makes. Last week we had a pitch that was good for three days, three umpires who did well and an England team on top.
    This pitch looks good for about three days...
    Eight wickets in the morning session, suggests it’s pretty much gone already!
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 35,772

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I always think it's weird how we get to hear (almost constantly) about how there's no free speech. It's almost like there is free speech.
    It's not actually weird in the slightest, unless you think curtailment of free speech results in literally no speech at all.
    That's an excellent point.

    Let me give you an example.

    A while back Nigel Farage got involved in a kerfuffle about a restaurant that wasn't keen on people breastfeeding. And I said I agreed with Nigel: it should be the choice of the restaurant whether it allowed breastfeeding or not, just as certain bars say No to under 21s or require gentlemen to wear ties.

    Ultimately, someone's restaurant (or website), someone's rules.

    That cuts two ways, of course. I can say 'no' to breastfeeding in my establishment. And I can say 'no' to people who - ohhh... - believe that the earth is flat. Or who don't believe in gay rights. Or whatever.

    My establishment. My rules.

    I should not, and cannot, be forced to serve someone I don't like. If I don't like their views, and don't want to serve them, that's my prerogative.

    This cuts both ways. If someone owns a bar and says they don't want to serve John T Jones because they don't serve people who think homosexuality should be legal, that's fine by me. (As in, I think that's dumb and stupid, and I reserve the right to stand outside your bar with a placard. But it's your bar and your rules. You choose who you serve.)

    Free speech is not consequence free speech.

    I allow you to say what you like. But the converse of that is that I should be allowed to serve who I like.

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 16,201
    So the band of impending chaos is in reality quite narrow. Outside Scotland, Labour need to get between 255 and 275 seats and the Conservatives would have something like 286 to 306 seats.

    Whilst that window is quite narrow, it’s also quite possible to happen.

    In reality, I don’t think there would be any problems. Labour would pivot to wanting to appear tough on Scotland (a bit like the French interior minister v Le Pen). Scotland will be a lost cause and it will be all about rUK for them.

    Just as there was unity in the EU over Brexit, the rUK will be United in giving Scotland the hardest of independence.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 29,456
    edited February 14
    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
    I completely disagree.
    Surely the point wasn't to achieve a guilty verdict but to make the Republican senators dip their hands in the blood.
    Quite.
    A bipartisan majority voted to convict; just not a supermajority.

    And the minority leader admitted the only reason he didn’t was because he delayed impeachment until after Trump left office (though he constitutionally wrong on the idea that you can’t impeach someone when they’ve left office).

    This is going to unite Republicans ? Or benefit them electorally ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    Question is whether the Indians would enforce a follow on should England fail to reach 129. My take is that they should not. Instead try to hammer out 200.

    The only hope I think here is for Ben Stokes to go into one-day mode. An all-out assault on the spin bowlers in an attempt to carve out fast runs. It's what Rohit and Pant did so brilliantly: attack as the best form of defence on a pitch like this.
    In my best Graham Chapman voice:

    You silly sod.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
    I completely disagree.
    Surely the point wasn't to achieve a guilty verdict but to make the Republican senators dip their hands in the blood.
    Quite.
    A bipartisan majority voted to convict; just not a supermajority.

    And the minority leader admitted the only reason he didn’t was because he delayed impeachment until after Trump left office (though he constitutionally wrong on the idea that you can’t impeach someone when they’ve left office).

    This is going to unite Republicans ? Or benefit them electorally ?
    I wonder what McConnell’s Wiki entry will be looking like?

    Something along the lines of ‘Mitch McConnell is an American politician, coward, liar, traitor and hypocrite, who admits he supports consequence free attempts to overthrow the Constitution by his party.’
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 29,456
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    What a difference a week makes. Last week we had a pitch that was good for three days, three umpires who did well and an England team on top.
    This pitch looks good for about three days...
    Eight wickets in the morning session, suggests it’s pretty much gone already!
    I meant only that there will be play tomorrow.
    Though with the way England are batting ....
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    edited February 14
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Don’t think this game will reach four days...

    What a difference a week makes. Last week we had a pitch that was good for three days, three umpires who did well and an England team on top.
    This pitch looks good for about three days...
    Eight wickets in the morning session, suggests it’s pretty much gone already!
    I meant only that there will be play tomorrow.
    Though with the way England are batting ....
    The follow on target looks a long way off at the moment, that’s for sure. And with Ashwin bowling like this, it looks further.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 9,331
    If England can get within 100 runs of India they might still have a chance.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    Andy_JS said:

    If England can get within 100 runs of India they might still have a chance.

    They look like they’ll be following-on at this rate. Could all be done and dusted by tonight.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Andy_JS said:

    If England can get within 100 runs of India they might still have a chance.

    And if I had the money of Hugh Grosvenor I wouldn’t have to work.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    I dunno. Lap rhinos might give some people the horn.
  • 1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    The bit that is working is that the drug companies (many of them around the world) found a vaccine that works, we got approval quickly and then our brilliant NHS staff are getting needles in arms.

    Even if we could ignore the grotesque chaos and London to Bristol line of dead bodies (which any decent person cannot), the notion that Shagger was personally responsible for the development of the vaccine round the world or our regulator signing it off or the NHS which was left on the brink of disaster by his actions and inactions now getting jabs in arms is preposterous.

    He has slaughtered tens of thousands who need not have died. He was brought businesses and people to ruin by excluding whole sectors from the support needed. He has actively interfered with the experts trying to keep this under control.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    As feared, the Indians have crafted a wicket made of the finest, crumbliest Lancashire cheese....

    Interesting to speculate how this match would have gone had England won the toss.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,160
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:
    I always think it's weird how we get to hear (almost constantly) about how there's no free speech. It's almost like there is free speech.
    It's not actually weird in the slightest, unless you think curtailment of free speech results in literally no speech at all.
    That's an excellent point.

    Let me give you an example.

    A while back Nigel Farage got involved in a kerfuffle about a restaurant that wasn't keen on people breastfeeding. And I said I agreed with Nigel: it should be the choice of the restaurant whether it allowed breastfeeding or not, just as certain bars say No to under 21s or require gentlemen to wear ties.

    Ultimately, someone's restaurant (or website), someone's rules.

    That cuts two ways, of course. I can say 'no' to breastfeeding in my establishment. And I can say 'no' to people who - ohhh... - believe that the earth is flat. Or who don't believe in gay rights. Or whatever.

    My establishment. My rules.

    I should not, and cannot, be forced to serve someone I don't like. If I don't like their views, and don't want to serve them, that's my prerogative.

    This cuts both ways. If someone owns a bar and says they don't want to serve John T Jones because they don't serve people who think homosexuality should be legal, that's fine by me. (As in, I think that's dumb and stupid, and I reserve the right to stand outside your bar with a placard. But it's your bar and your rules. You choose who you serve.)

    Free speech is not consequence free speech.

    I allow you to say what you like. But the converse of that is that I should be allowed to serve who I like.

    I would suggest that you should be able to set rules that anyone can meet - politeness, dress code, behaviour. But not to discriminate over characteristics that people cannot change.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,835
    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998

    As feared, the Indians have crafted a wicket made of the finest, crumbliest Lancashire cheese....

    Interesting to speculate how this match would have gone had England won the toss.

    Probably something of a mirror image of how it’s turned out. Sadly, the match was basically decided by the toss, with the pitch not really making it to the second day.

    I’m in favour of the oft-mooted proposal to give the choice to the visiting captain rather than have a toss - that might focus the minds of the home team, to have the groundsmen prepare something more balanced.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,835
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    I dunno. Lap rhinos might give some people the horn.
    I suppose it would depend how much they are charged.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    edited February 14
    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    The bit that is working is that the drug companies (many of them around the world) found a vaccine that works, we got approval quickly and then our brilliant NHS staff are getting needles in arms.

    Even if we could ignore the grotesque chaos and London to Bristol line of dead bodies (which any decent person cannot), the notion that Shagger was personally responsible for the development of the vaccine round the world or our regulator signing it off or the NHS which was left on the brink of disaster by his actions and inactions now getting jabs in arms is preposterous.

    He has slaughtered tens of thousands who need not have died. He was brought businesses and people to ruin by excluding whole sectors from the support needed. He has actively interfered with the experts trying to keep this under control.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    "the PM has slaughtered tens of thousands"?

    Only February and yet we already have the 2021 Hyperbole Champion.

  • On topic, whilst it is a thought-provoking piece, I think it asks the wrong question. In the run up to the 2024 election we face the prospect of both Scotland and Northern Ireland being at least vocally on the cusp of leaving the union. The question for English parties is less "how do we form a majority" than "how do we try to keep the country intact".

    Faced with secession movements in both Scotland and NI - with undoubtedly the Welsh saying "don't forget us" and some English regions (bloody Yorkshire as the first on the list) complaining too about their lot, the obvious move is a national government.

    The only option the UK has to keep things together is to take a blank piece of paper, ask what people want, then craft a new constitution that allows for it. Don't forget that the Tories want to scrap an entire tier of (mainly Tory) local government, which will cause ruptions in English shires as well.

    Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else. Labour have lost their connection with the middle ground, and the muscle memory of people instinctively voting labour because we vote Labour will only see them continue to decline. The LibDems haven't recovered from the 2015 election and like the Tories became the antiBrexit party and no longer have anything much to say now its done. So a 2024 election isn't remotely clear even in England as who will vote for what and why is up in the air...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    On topic, whilst it is a thought-provoking piece, I think it asks the wrong question. In the run up to the 2024 election we face the prospect of both Scotland and Northern Ireland being at least vocally on the cusp of leaving the union. The question for English parties is less "how do we form a majority" than "how do we try to keep the country intact".

    Faced with secession movements in both Scotland and NI - with undoubtedly the Welsh saying "don't forget us" and some English regions (bloody Yorkshire as the first on the list) complaining too about their lot, the obvious move is a national government.

    The only option the UK has to keep things together is to take a blank piece of paper, ask what people want, then craft a new constitution that allows for it. Don't forget that the Tories want to scrap an entire tier of (mainly Tory) local government, which will cause ruptions in English shires as well.

    Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else. Labour have lost their connection with the middle ground, and the muscle memory of people instinctively voting labour because we vote Labour will only see them continue to decline. The LibDems haven't recovered from the 2015 election and like the Tories became the antiBrexit party and no longer have anything much to say now its done. So a 2024 election isn't remotely clear even in England as who will vote for what and why is up in the air...

    Does anyone have any understanding whatsoever of the rationale behind local government reform?

    It seems to be making things more shambolic and expensive, not less.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    edited February 14
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    I dunno. Lap rhinos might give some people the horn.
    I suppose it would depend how much they are charged.
    More likely the breeding process would just go round and round pointlessly for a long time.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 8,997
    edited February 14

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    The bit that is working is that the drug companies (many of them around the world) found a vaccine that works, we got approval quickly and then our brilliant NHS staff are getting needles in arms.

    Even if we could ignore the grotesque chaos and London to Bristol line of dead bodies (which any decent person cannot), the notion that Shagger was personally responsible for the development of the vaccine round the world or our regulator signing it off or the NHS which was left on the brink of disaster by his actions and inactions now getting jabs in arms is preposterous.

    He has slaughtered tens of thousands who need not have died. He was brought businesses and people to ruin by excluding whole sectors from the support needed. He has actively interfered with the experts trying to keep this under control.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    "the PM has slaughtered tens of thousands"?

    Only February and yet we already have the 2021 Hyperbole Champion.

    You see when he had the NHS ordered to send pox positive patients back to their care homes? If that wasn't slaughter of the tens of thousands their own figures confirm were killed by it then what is?

    "Oh the PM isn't responsible". Bullshit. Which is why our death rate is so outrageously high. On pretty much every major decision last year he fucked it. Send them back to care homes to kill the population. Eat out to do nothing for hospitality but help keep the pox circulating. Send schools back, no transmission at all there. a multiplicity of tier systems that collapse under their own contradictions and get immediately dropped. Refusing the circuit break saying that "the scientists advise, we decide. Telling people to go on holiday with that twatty Ester McVey green screen promo video. Saying "Covid doesn't transmit at Christmas, 5 days of festivities" and then "we have reluctantly cancelled this, we always follow the science"

    You want me to go on? Oh yes - the border. Wide open, not even so much as the locator forms checked.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    FFS Pope.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 8,997
    edited February 14
    ydoethur said:

    On topic, whilst it is a thought-provoking piece, I think it asks the wrong question. In the run up to the 2024 election we face the prospect of both Scotland and Northern Ireland being at least vocally on the cusp of leaving the union. The question for English parties is less "how do we form a majority" than "how do we try to keep the country intact".

    Faced with secession movements in both Scotland and NI - with undoubtedly the Welsh saying "don't forget us" and some English regions (bloody Yorkshire as the first on the list) complaining too about their lot, the obvious move is a national government.

    The only option the UK has to keep things together is to take a blank piece of paper, ask what people want, then craft a new constitution that allows for it. Don't forget that the Tories want to scrap an entire tier of (mainly Tory) local government, which will cause ruptions in English shires as well.

    Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else. Labour have lost their connection with the middle ground, and the muscle memory of people instinctively voting labour because we vote Labour will only see them continue to decline. The LibDems haven't recovered from the 2015 election and like the Tories became the antiBrexit party and no longer have anything much to say now its done. So a 2024 election isn't remotely clear even in England as who will vote for what and why is up in the air...

    Does anyone have any understanding whatsoever of the rationale behind local government reform?

    It seems to be making things more shambolic and expensive, not less.
    Congratulations! You have understood the rationale.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    ydoethur said:

    FFS Pope.

    Great catch, to be fair. Follow-on score now looking very optimistic.
  • Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    I dunno. Lap rhinos might give some people the horn.
    I suppose it would depend how much they are charged.
    Charged rhinos?
    That's a shocking idea.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,835
    edited February 14
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,794
    edited February 14
    There should be an English word for the feeling you have starting your day with the disappointment of an overnight test match score. Possibly the most English of emotions as you stoically then get on with the day.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    I dunno. Lap rhinos might give some people the horn.
    I suppose it would depend how much they are charged.
    Charged rhinos?
    That's a shocking idea.
    You don’t sound positive about it.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 9,331
    edited February 14
    I dont think its sour grapes to say this isnt really a suitable pitch for a 5 day match.

    Channel 4 commentator thinks its unlikely that India would enforce the follow on.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,794
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998
    edited February 14
    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    But not if the SNP are in government on the UK side .

    Also, having negotiated the break-up of the UK in advance, it should really require the whole of the UK to then vote on it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 19,391
    Ah, I see the government that demands that schools and universities not allow certain speech is positioning itself as the champion of free speech again.

    All culture war, all the time.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    One potentially interesting development in the cricket:

    Pujara is not fit to field.

    Rumours of a broken finger. Which would rule him out of the rest of the series.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    That was an horrendous Mow.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,794
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    As for the impact on WW2, would the Germans have headed south rather than east, securing the rhino's homelands - rather than pushing for that fatal mistake of Moscow? Africa, not Asia. The U-boats based out of Cape Town would have ensured that the world could not trade between Europe, Africa and Asia. Germany would have had Africa's huge resources - including its oil-resource, shifting the planning of the Case Blue and Operation Edelweiss charge towards Baku.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    As for the impact on WW2, would the Germans have headed south rather than east, securing the rhino's homelands - rather than pushing for that fatal mistake of Moscow? Africa, not Asia. The U-boats based out of Cape Town would have ensured that the world could not trade between Europe, Africa and Asia. Germany would have had Africa's huge resources - including its oil-resource, shifting the planning of the Case Blue and Operation Edelweiss charge towards Baku.
    But if they had declared for the rhinos, surely the elephants would have kicked their racist arses all the way back to Berlin?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited February 14


    Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else.

    A nice try but untrue. Brexit was never the defining meme for Boris. It was more a means to an end, a vehicle for conveying him and his party to power and then for him to enact his vision, which is real.

    The Conservatives under Boris have a HUGE cause, and probably the biggest since WWII. It's re-casting the UK, free from the EU, in an international and global way. A country of freedoms and international trade. It may not quite emulate Singapore in the west, but that's not too far wide of the mark. This aspect of the laissez-faire is much more Boris.

    I know you don't like it. I don't much either. But that doesn't mean you have a right to pretend it doesn't exist.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,794
    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    You have met the Lib Dems? I suppose their nutters are at the more benign end of the spectrum, but like all political parties they attract some serious eccentrics. Their nutter/normal ratio is one of the worst.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 8,904
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
    Biden’s going to struggle to reunite the country with hyper-partisans like Pelosi around.

    The whole thing was just political theatre, the Dems should have known they’d struggle to tie Trump directly to the Capitol tilts, in the eyes of sufficient numbers of Republican Senators.

    As you say, they should have just ignored it and left a very split GOP.
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:
    The Democrats in Congress have shown political ineptitude on an almost unprecedented scale. They should have left this alone and allowed the GOP to eat itself from the insides out. They have almost resurrected Trump.
    Biden’s going to struggle to reunite the country with hyper-partisans like Pelosi around.

    The whole thing was just political theatre, the Dems should have known they’d struggle to tie Trump directly to the Capitol tilts, in the eyes of sufficient numbers of Republican Senators.

    As you say, they should have just ignored it and left a very split GOP.
    I think that the Democrats succeeded in tying "Trump directly to the Capitol tilts" in the eyes of most Republican Senators, I usupect that very few doubt that Trump is the Inciter in Chief and responsible for the riot. Only 7 voted that way, many others didn't for political reasons - they don't want to be 'primaried'.
    Can anyone seriously think that the Capitol riot would have happened if Trump had not arranged that rally for that date, time and place and addressed it in the way he did.
  • GlengyleGlengyle Posts: 10
    Very thought provoking piece. However, the thoughts provoked are tending to undermine the premises on which it is based.
    1. The SNP seems to be on the verge of tearing itself apart with a reducing probability of Nicola still being leader at the time of the next General Election.
    2. Anas Sarwar looks to have a good chance of becoming a reasonably impressive leader of the Labour Party in Scotland.
    3. Scotland is much less likely to vote for independence with a Labour Government in Westminster.
    4. By the time of any referendum we may well still be in very choppy economic waters with the fiscal horrors and realities of independence ever more apparent.
    All in all a relatively cheery prospect for opponents of Scottish independence.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,835


    Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else. Labour have lost their connection with the middle ground, and the muscle memory of people instinctively voting labour because we vote Labour will only see them continue to decline. The LibDems haven't recovered from the 2015 election and like the Tories became the antiBrexit party and no longer have anything much to say now its done. So a 2024 election isn't remotely clear even in England as who will vote for what and why is up in the air...

    It really is hard to see what the next GE will be about, with a Tory party on an eye watering bender, while abolishing the NHS internal market etc. How can Labour outspend that? The LDs are invisible, and became too much of a single issue party, yet have said Rejoin will not be the manifesto. Everyone does greenwash nowadays.

    The next election will be an exercise in competitive flag waving, as well as complaints about "cancel culture" by people who are never off our screens.

    Personally, I would quite like at least one party that takes government debt and deficit seriously, but can't see that happening.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,794
    Foxy said:


    Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else. Labour have lost their connection with the middle ground, and the muscle memory of people instinctively voting labour because we vote Labour will only see them continue to decline. The LibDems haven't recovered from the 2015 election and like the Tories became the antiBrexit party and no longer have anything much to say now its done. So a 2024 election isn't remotely clear even in England as who will vote for what and why is up in the air...

    It really is hard to see what the next GE will be about, with a Tory party on an eye watering bender, while abolishing the NHS internal market etc. How can Labour outspend that? The LDs are invisible, and became too much of a single issue party, yet have said Rejoin will not be the manifesto. Everyone does greenwash nowadays.

    The next election will be an exercise in competitive flag waving, as well as complaints about "cancel culture" by people who are never off our screens.

    Personally, I would quite like at least one party that takes government debt and deficit seriously, but can't see that happening.
    The election after next might be rather interesting.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    As for the impact on WW2, would the Germans have headed south rather than east, securing the rhino's homelands - rather than pushing for that fatal mistake of Moscow? Africa, not Asia. The U-boats based out of Cape Town would have ensured that the world could not trade between Europe, Africa and Asia. Germany would have had Africa's huge resources - including its oil-resource, shifting the planning of the Case Blue and Operation Edelweiss charge towards Baku.
    But if they had declared for the rhinos, surely the elephants would have kicked their racist arses all the way back to Berlin?
    Who was WW2's Hannibal?
  • 1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

    Yes. If it is no longer the case that Sturgeon has handled it best then you are saying that Johnson has handled it best, aren't you?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    As for the impact on WW2, would the Germans have headed south rather than east, securing the rhino's homelands - rather than pushing for that fatal mistake of Moscow? Africa, not Asia. The U-boats based out of Cape Town would have ensured that the world could not trade between Europe, Africa and Asia. Germany would have had Africa's huge resources - including its oil-resource, shifting the planning of the Case Blue and Operation Edelweiss charge towards Baku.
    But if they had declared for the rhinos, surely the elephants would have kicked their racist arses all the way back to Berlin?
    Who was WW2's Hannibal?
    Rommel? Good start, but couldn’t follow through.

    Zama’s a bitch from that point of view.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    ydoethur said:

    One potentially interesting development in the cricket:

    Pujara is not fit to field.

    Rumours of a broken finger. Which would rule him out of the rest of the series.

    Body-line. It's the way to go....
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Tony Blair demonstrated that you can have an utterly vacuous meme and galvanise the country.

    I'm convinced Boris is doing the same. Coming out of this pandemic on the back of a stunning vaccination rollout I'm convinced he'll win a landslide.

    You don't need massive policy grandstanding. Most people are happy enough with an ebullient figure making them feel better. Tony Blair did it. Boris likewise.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 9,331

    Tony Blair demonstrated that you can have an utterly vacuous meme and galvanise the country.

    I'm convinced Boris is doing the same. Coming out of this pandemic on the back of a stunning vaccination rollout I'm convinced he'll win a landslide.

    You don't need massive policy grandstanding. Most people are happy enough with an ebullient figure making them feel better. Tony Blair did it. Boris likewise.

    People are rallying round Boris during a crisis as they did with Churchill during the war.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

    Yes. If it is no longer the case that Sturgeon has handled it best then you are saying that Johnson has handled it best, aren't you?
    No. That's far too simplistic.

    Boris made terrible mistakes early on and Sturgeon was relatively assured. But these days Sturgeon is looking a lot less impressive, whilst Boris has really started to get his act together. We're broadly getting the policies right now and all of it overshadowed by a stunning vaccination rollout, for which Boris will take a lot of the credit, even if many others should share the plaudits.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,989
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Doethur, good start?

    Hannibal scored multiple epic victories over Roman armies and then marauded around Italy for a decade without suffering a single defeat.

    His being on the losing side was due to the fact that, unlike Alexander or Caesar, he wasn't also supreme political leader and he wasn't sent sufficient reinforcements. That, coupled with Rome's invincible combination of pathological patriotism and rock solid constitutional foundation.

    This is why the Second Punic War is so worthy of study. It has fantastic battles, logistical challenges, and political lessons. Whether interested in only military matters or how to make a state robust, there's a lot to learn.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,835
    edited February 14

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    As for the impact on WW2, would the Germans have headed south rather than east, securing the rhino's homelands - rather than pushing for that fatal mistake of Moscow? Africa, not Asia. The U-boats based out of Cape Town would have ensured that the world could not trade between Europe, Africa and Asia. Germany would have had Africa's huge resources - including its oil-resource, shifting the planning of the Case Blue and Operation Edelweiss charge towards Baku.
    I think you are thinking in the wrong direction. We know that wooly rhinos were prevalent in Eurasia, and surely selective breeding would have led to variants suited to the climes of the Russian steppe.

    I think that WW2 wouldn't have happened. If ever there was a boy who needed an affectionate pet, it was young Adolf. I imagine that he would have had an obscure and quiet provincial life as a post office official, notable only for winning prizes for his Tyrolean Mountain Rhinos at Crufts.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 29,998

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I think the only realistic way that rhinoceros could be kept as pets would be through selective breeding. Humans bred dogs from wolves to many different forms and sizes. I suspect that dog sized rhinos could make quite good watch-rhinos with acute hearing and smell to drive off interlopers. Continence and grazing would mean more garden domestication than living room. I don't see lap rhinos being too popular.

    I dunno. Lap rhinos might give some people the horn.
    Those are spearmint rhinos.
    The tastiest rhinos, well at least the most liberated.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
    I actually think the Tory quotient of nutters in Westminster is reducing. From what I am seeing, the new intake are very light on Bufton-Tufton speak first, think later (if at all) types. UKIP with its bongo-bongo land and its "clean behind the fridge, woman" notions proved a happier home for them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Doethur, good start?

    Hannibal scored multiple epic victories over Roman armies and then marauded around Italy for a decade without suffering a single defeat.

    His being on the losing side was due to the fact that, unlike Alexander or Caesar, he wasn't also supreme political leader and he wasn't sent sufficient reinforcements. That, coupled with Rome's invincible combination of pathological patriotism and rock solid constitutional foundation.

    This is why the Second Punic War is so worthy of study. It has fantastic battles, logistical challenges, and political lessons. Whether interested in only military matters or how to make a state robust, there's a lot to learn.

    Sounds like a pretty fair comparison to me, tbh.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
    I actually think the Tory quotient of nutters in Westminster is reducing. From what I am seeing, the new intake are very light on Bufton-Tufton speak first, think later (if at all) types. UKIP with its bongo-bongo land and its "clean behind the fridge, woman" notions proved a happier home for them.
    Then how the hell are the likes of Mogg and Patel still in it?
  • 1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

    Yes. If it is no longer the case that Sturgeon has handled it best then you are saying that Johnson has handled it best, aren't you?
    No. That's far too simplistic.

    Boris made terrible mistakes early on and Sturgeon was relatively assured. But these days Sturgeon is looking a lot less impressive, whilst Boris has really started to get his act together. We're broadly getting the policies right now and all of it overshadowed by a stunning vaccination rollout, for which Boris will take a lot of the credit, even if many others should share the plaudits.
    OK. So back to the question. Someone is handling it best - you said Sturgeon *was*. If she no longer is handling it best, who is in your opinion?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,794
    edited February 14

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
    I actually think the Tory quotient of nutters in Westminster is reducing. From what I am seeing, the new intake are very light on Bufton-Tufton speak first, think later (if at all) types. UKIP with its bongo-bongo land and its "clean behind the fridge, woman" notions proved a happier home for them.
    Rees Mogg, Johnson, Gove, Patel, the one obsessed with cheese*. All serious nutters.

    *Truss
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093
    Kohli looks annoyed there.

    Ashwin rapidly replacing Stuart Broad and Shane Watson as the most over-optimistic reviewer in world cricket.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    edited February 14
    Andy_JS said:

    Tony Blair demonstrated that you can have an utterly vacuous meme and galvanise the country.

    I'm convinced Boris is doing the same. Coming out of this pandemic on the back of a stunning vaccination rollout I'm convinced he'll win a landslide.

    You don't need massive policy grandstanding. Most people are happy enough with an ebullient figure making them feel better. Tony Blair did it. Boris likewise.

    People are rallying round Boris during a crisis as they did with Churchill during the war.
    Perhaps perhaps perhaps Andy but that doesn't mean we're in for a 1945 election result. The circumstances were very different and Clem Attlee offered a stunning radical alternative to the social inequalities and fractured country in a manner that Keir Starmer will never do.

    There's something deeper though. WWII brought people together. Really bound the nation as one, breaking all social bonds. Officers and ranks fought, and sometimes died, side by side. People worked alongside one another in the common effort, huddling in air raid shelters. The Royal Army Education Corps worked tirelessly to sew socialism into the hearts and minds of people.

    I don't think this pandemic has unified in the same way. If anything people are more fractured and isolated than at any time in their lives. And yet the Conservatives have led the world (pretty much) in lighting a beacon to lead us out of it. We have vaccinated 15 million people already and we're well on course to returning to a semblance of normality by the summer, certainly the autumn.

    Whatever the true mechanics of this, people will undoubtedly associate Brexit with the stunning UK vaccine rollout. Contrast that with the scandal in the EU (CNN's word this morning) and I can't see anything other than a crushing Boris Johnson victory next time around.

    It's not my kind of politics. It's not my kind of country and I may well emigrate. But I think the writing's on the wall.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 54,989
    Mr. Doethur, it underestimates Hannibal massively.

    He was stomping around Italy for more than twice as long as World War Two lasted, and the best anyone managed was a score draw against him. That's incredible from a logistical, strategic, and tactical perspective.

    I only know a bit about Rommel, and he does sound an impressive leader, but the scale of difference is immense.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    Mr. Doethur, it underestimates Hannibal massively.

    He was stomping around Italy for more than twice as long as World War Two lasted, and the best anyone managed was a score draw against him. That's incredible from a logistical, strategic, and tactical perspective.

    I only know a bit about Rommel, and he does sound an impressive leader, but the scale of difference is immense.

    Rommel was the man who would Caesar nopportunity, but be let down by lousy logistics because Hitler was stupidly obsessed with totally failing to conquer the USSR when he could have had the entire Middle East - and its oil - by sending one-third of those forces to Alamein.
  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

    Yes. If it is no longer the case that Sturgeon has handled it best then you are saying that Johnson has handled it best, aren't you?
    No. That's far too simplistic.

    Boris made terrible mistakes early on and Sturgeon was relatively assured. But these days Sturgeon is looking a lot less impressive, whilst Boris has really started to get his act together. We're broadly getting the policies right now and all of it overshadowed by a stunning vaccination rollout, for which Boris will take a lot of the credit, even if many others should share the plaudits.
    OK. So back to the question. Someone is handling it best - you said Sturgeon *was*. If she no longer is handling it best, who is in your opinion?
    Too simplistic. I bemoan the social media simplicity and loss of nuance.

    There are strengths and weaknesses and the UK is doing much better now but still not perfect. Apart from on vaccinations, which is simply stellar.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 1,349
    Andy_JS said:

    I dont think its sour grapes to say this isnt really a suitable pitch for a 5 day match.

    Channel 4 commentator thinks its unlikely that India would enforce the follow on.

    At least let no one complain the next time English grounds staff prepare a seaming, green top and England run through a sub continent side like a hot knife through butter. This pitch is probably just about acceptable (300-6) but surely it was a massive gamble on winning the toss?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 38,769
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
    I actually think the Tory quotient of nutters in Westminster is reducing. From what I am seeing, the new intake are very light on Bufton-Tufton speak first, think later (if at all) types. UKIP with its bongo-bongo land and its "clean behind the fridge, woman" notions proved a happier home for them.
    Then how the hell are the likes of Mogg and Patel still in it?
    Rees-Mogg is retained for a shits-n-giggles link to the 18th century.

    Moving Patel out would look racist. Or something. But frankly, the real reason is because no-one is brave enough to tell her she's gone..... Are you?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 25,697
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    Calm yerself and tuck it back in yer panties, there won’t be a ‘Lab/SNP coalition’ or ‘SNP minsters’ in the first place.

  • Final point - all of the parties are lost without a cause. The Tories stopped being Conservative and Unionists and became the Brexit Party. Now that is done* they have literally nothing to say on anything else.

    A nice try but untrue. Brexit was never the defining meme for Boris. It was more a means to an end, a vehicle for conveying him and his party to power and then for him to enact his vision, which is real.

    The Conservatives under Boris have a HUGE cause, and probably the biggest since WWII. It's re-casting the UK, free from the EU, in an international and global way. A country of freedoms and international trade. It may not quite emulate Singapore in the west, but that's not too far wide of the mark. This aspect of the laissez-faire is much more Boris.

    I know you don't like it. I don't much either. But that doesn't mean you have a right to pretend it doesn't exist.
    Really? How is he doing that? Specifically? I know that Truss proclaimed an "Enhanced Trade Partnership" with India but it wasn't a trade deal, or even an agreement, or even a piece of paper to ceremonially sign. She's done a stack of continuity deals that binds us to the existing EU-that country deal that was already in place. She said "lets lift the EU counter sanctions against America!" who said "gee thanks" and kept their sanctions against us in place.

    So aside from them not actually doing anything at all on "recasting the UK free from the EU" that is still Brexit. They have no domestic agenda other than denial of their own policy impacts. As with world trade, "levelling up" has no cash behind it and hasn't even promised to replace the EU cash the regions used to get.

    I know you don't like it. I don't much either. But that doesn't mean you have a right to pretend things exist that don't. The rest of us can see stark naked Johnson's johnson no matter how much you pretend he is wearing a splendid new outfit.


  • GaussianGaussian Posts: 791

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

    Scotland was only ever a week or so behind on vaccinations, and is down to a couple of days now. Obviously that's been a big story for a couple of weeks, but will probably fade pretty quickly.

    A much bigger worry for Sturgeon just now is that she'd promised to reopen early school years in a week, with only weak caveating, which people didn't really hear. Yet the fall in cases in Scotland has pretty much stalled in the last few days.

    So now she gets a choice between either upsetting parents who are desperate for a break from their wee darlings, or risking starting another wave that would quickly take Scotland to the top of the case rate table.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 36,093

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
    I actually think the Tory quotient of nutters in Westminster is reducing. From what I am seeing, the new intake are very light on Bufton-Tufton speak first, think later (if at all) types. UKIP with its bongo-bongo land and its "clean behind the fridge, woman" notions proved a happier home for them.
    Then how the hell are the likes of Mogg and Patel still in it?
    Rees-Mogg is retained for a shits-n-giggles link to the 18th century.

    Moving Patel out would look racist. Or something. But frankly, the real reason is because no-one is brave enough to tell her she's gone..... Are you?
    Possibly not.

    Make it Gavin Williamson, the nuttiest of the nutters, however...
  • StockyStocky Posts: 5,066
    edited February 14

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    I don't think Scottish representation during withdrawal negotiations would be much of a practical problem. The UK kept MEPs throughout Brexit negotiations.

    I do think parties led by Starmer, Davey and Sturgeon would manage a hung Parliament better than the last hung Parliament.

    What practical powers did MEPs have during Brexit negotiations? My understanding was all they could do was approve or reject the final trading agreement, negotiated by the council with that self important twat Juncker shoving his oar in repeatedly on behalf of the Commission.

    This obviously would be much less power than Scottish MPs would have. After all, Parliament can remove a Prime Minister at any moment it chooses.

    But if there’s more to it than that, feel free to enlighten me.
    A Lab/SNP coalition during the negotiation phase would be a proper constitutional crisis.
    We could have SNP ministers ‘negotiating’ on the UK side.

    A good UK government will have learned from the EU, and have a two-stage process - with debt, currency and border the only three subjects for discussion in the first phase.
    I think it would be far better to have the negotiations on terms of separation before the vote. It would inform the debate usefully and be simpler to implement. A lesson of Brexit.
    Even more problematic if SNP votes are supporting the government. They would try and insist on every unicorn in their manifesto.
    SNP vs DUP/ERG 🤷‍♂️
    OR, concede the referendum and elect a new government to negotiate the terms.
    Personally I am tired of nutters, nationalists and other extremists having the whip hand in British politics.
    But unless we elect a Liberal Democrat majority govt, we are unfortunately stuck with them.
    When do you plan to exclude the nutters from the LibDems?
    If Layla Moran and Wera Hobhouse lose their seats to the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, the rest are OK.

    For Labour, it’s rather more.

    For the Tories it’s rapidly becoming the bloody lot.

    For the SNP, we’re there already.
    I actually think the Tory quotient of nutters in Westminster is reducing. From what I am seeing, the new intake are very light on Bufton-Tufton speak first, think later (if at all) types. UKIP with its bongo-bongo land and its "clean behind the fridge, woman" notions proved a happier home for them.
    Then how the hell are the likes of Mogg and Patel still in it?
    Rees-Mogg is retained for a shits-n-giggles link to the 18th century.

    Moving Patel out would look racist. Or something. But frankly, the real reason is because no-one is brave enough to tell her she's gone..... Are you?
    The predicted reshuffle early this year didn`t happen and I think that, at root, Johnson doesn`t like giving bad news to people, is indecisive and prone to having his mind changed by the last person he spoke to.

    Accordingly, it wouldn`t surprise me if we went all the way to 2024 with no reshuffle, or at least only very few changes.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 6,863
    It’s pretty unlikely they’d have a smoother exit with the Conservatives controlling proceedings, given their recent takeover by chippy English nationalism.

    It was at this juncture that one was able to guess the identity of the author without scrolling down to the end.

    The real world consequence of this counterfactual is that it may well be much harder for the Conservatives to scare voters about the dangers of SNP influence at the next election than they presently seem to imagine.

    If it does come down to the Government trying to use Scotland as a weapon against Labour, then sophisticated arguments about theoretical power balances in Parliament are unlikely to enter the conversation. The line will, once again, be about puppeteering of a weak Labour leader by the First Minister - and the subtext will be all about the Scottish Government helping itself to as much of the contents of the Treasury as it can haul off.

    Besides, when we're talking about the voters being keen or otherwise on Nicola Sturgeon, we need to understand which voters exactly. It doesn't matter if she's regarded as the best thing since sliced bread in London. London scarcely matters anymore in the context of a General Election (and most of the South isn't in play either.) The marginal defences of both Labour and the Tories are disproportionately concentrated in the Red Wall and amongst its rubble. If "chippy English nationalism" really is in play here - and FWIW recent survey evidence would appear to suggest that the Tory membership at least contains very few "English nationalists" - then it might play rather better in Burnley than in Brent.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 1,349

    1st.

    Unlike Alastair's covid piece this time last year, this one will not age well. There is so much speculation and the final paragraph contains a fatal flaw. Stating that the English think Sturgeon has handled the pandemic best (which is no longer true) is not the same as saying she is a popular choice amongst English voters in politics at large. That's a non sequitur.

    I fear this piece is wish-casting.

    I know that others keep pointing this out to you, but the PM has NOT handled the pandemic best.

    And you think *that* is doing the best job? Madness.
    Er, did you actually read my message? I never once mentioned that the PM has handled this pandemic best. Early on, it was shockingly badly handled.

    What I actually wrote is that simply because Sturgeon was viewed as having handled it best, which is no longer the case (viz. vaccination), does not mean she is liked or trusted on wider political issues south of the border. She is greatly feared.

    Yes. If it is no longer the case that Sturgeon has handled it best then you are saying that Johnson has handled it best, aren't you?
    Drakeford. You only need to see the vaccination numbers, and hear his cheerleaders on here...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 21,835
    Outbreak in Auckland I see, with prompt lockdown.



Sign In or Register to comment.