politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What The Great Repeal Bill means for triggering Article 50

No prizes for second....or Remain....

Surely a 'ditherer' doesn't make 'bold moves'?

Interestingly neither the Sunday Times nor Sunday Mail appear to have big anti-May stories this week, unlike last......I wonder if they learned from their readers' responses.....?

I'm not surprised at the record turn out to the Tory Conference - I suspect many members will feel May is 'one of us' - something they never really felt with Cameron (let alone Osborne) for all his political skill....

On a wardrobe note, while the Mail story observes May at 60 (today) is the oldest PM since Thatcher, I don't recall Thatcher wearing skinny jeans:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3817450/Theresa-arrives-Birmingham-Tory-party-conference-Prime-Minister-police-blanket-city-2-5MILLION-security-operation.html

Jo Maugham QC appeared to be having a rethink last night. The Sunday Times have reported that the Act will postdate triggering A50. which apparently suggests that the challenge will still happen.

Trump taxes are leaking.

Potentially significant as he seems to have no answers. Anyway, there's a fair chance there are more leaks to come.


I've laid more trump at 3.85.

Gadfly said:

Jo Maugham QC appeared to be having a rethink last night. The Sunday Times have reported that the Act will postdate triggering A50. which apparently suggests that the challenge will still happen.

He also tweets: If I were dead set on Leaving, this is exactly what I would do.

And:

Here's the Manifesto commitment to "respect the outcome". Under Salisbury convention, would a Repeal Act still need HL approval?

His 'rethink' is:

Reading the (far better) Sunday Times report it looks like the challenge will still happen because the Act will postdate triggering A50.

The Legal position may be unchanged, but I suspect the politics is changed - MPs now have a vote - on repealing the 1972 European Communities Act

CarlottaVance said:

619 said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

anyone with any decency stopped supported him months ago. Its just scumbags now. Hopefully they are limited in number!

With all due respect - that is the sort of 'thinking' that won the referendum for REMAIN.

I think he's an obnoxious git - but he's tapped into the fears and concerns of those left behind by globalisation - and demonising them won't change their minds.

And they said PB Tories never learn! (We do, quite well in fact!)

CarlottaVance said:

619 said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

anyone with any decency stopped supported him months ago. Its just scumbags now. Hopefully they are limited in number!

With all due respect - that is the sort of 'thinking' that won the referendum for REMAIN.

I think he's an obnoxious git - but he's tapped into the fears and concerns of those left behind by globalisation - and demonising them won't change their minds.

Indeed. Trump is unelectable in my view, but how decent a human being is someone who believes 45% of the US electorate are scumbags?

619 said:

MTimT said:

CarlottaVance said:

619 said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

anyone with any decency stopped supported him months ago. Its just scumbags now. Hopefully they are limited in number!

With all due respect - that is the sort of 'thinking' that won the referendum for REMAIN.

I think he's an obnoxious git - but he's tapped into the fears and concerns of those left behind by globalisation - and demonising them won't change their minds.

Indeed. Trump is unelectable in my view, but how decent a human being is someone who believes 45% of the US electorate are scumbags?

what is trump offering other than racism and hate at this point???

Not Hillary.

That's pretty much his USP

Is four years of having an idiot like Trump in charge, the price worth paying for getting the big money and lobbyists out of Washington? Discuss.

619 said:

Indigo said:

619 said:

MTimT said:

CarlottaVance said:

619 said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

anyone with any decency stopped supported him months ago. Its just scumbags now. Hopefully they are limited in number!

With all due respect - that is the sort of 'thinking' that won the referendum for REMAIN.

I think he's an obnoxious git - but he's tapped into the fears and concerns of those left behind by globalisation - and demonising them won't change their minds.

Indeed. Trump is unelectable in my view, but how decent a human being is someone who believes 45% of the US electorate are scumbags?

what is trump offering other than racism and hate at this point???

That is beside the point. Being rude about 45% of Americans is just going to make them more determined to vote for Trump. If you really hate Trump, you would be taking a smarter approach which might ween a few of his voters away, calling them names won't.

no logical reason to vote for a crazy racist liar like trump

You answer your own question - no logical reason, but for some emotional ones.

Which is why calling them names is spectacularly unsuited to getting them to change their minds.

Even if it does make you feel better about yourself.

As Lady Violet (Maggie Smith's character in Downton Abbey) observed

'Does it ever get cold on the moral high ground'?

Sandpit said:

Is four years of having an idiot like Trump in charge, the price worth paying for getting the big money and lobbyists out of Washington? Discuss.

First, will it get big money and lobbyists out of Washington?
Second will it make it more likely that Russia will become more expansionist in say Ukraine and the Baltic States?
And that's just for starters.

What should the Great Repeal Bill say? Simply that the 48% are all traitors & therefore it's legal to shoot them all dead. Or, have I misunderstood? If so, I', sure one or other of the Seans, or even Charles, can explain...

Sandpit said:

Is four years of having an idiot like Trump in charge, the price worth paying for getting the big money and lobbyists out of Washington? Discuss.

Yeah, like that would happen.

Sandpit said:

Is four years of having an idiot like Trump in charge, the price worth paying for getting the big money and lobbyists out of Washington? Discuss.

Probably better put Clinton in charge and watch her squirm as the banking sector goes tits up again.

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

Morning. Does anyone think the intention to declare Article 50 early next year has been changed by yesterday's announcements? If not, then the 1/5 pays out in six months max and is good value, if it's going to be 18 months as TSE suggests then the time value of money goes against the bet.

It doesn't change anything. It doesn't take effect until we actually leave, it's just a sop to the Tory party conference.

Which is dominating the Sunday front pages....

And BBC News: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk

....not bad for a 'sop'......

This is the most ill-tempered POTUS campaign of all time, but in the end it doesn't matter. It's a simple question of the USA's current demographics. I just don't see how Trump can win, and analogies with the referendum are irrelevant to that fact.

My memory's slightly dodgy, but didn't someone on here suggest a GRB a way forward before the referendum?

Can anyone remember who it was?

Mr 619,

"I think you are very much overselling clinton's flaws and underselling trumps."

Not from the point of view of a Tump waverer.

"its more 'Stop voting for that crazy racist over there who hates women. DO NOT GIVE HIM ACCESS TO NUCLEAR WEOPENS'."

Is better and is more the official Democrat positIon, but needs to be more nuanced. But many Democrat supporters can't stop reverting to the seven-year-old.

Even a few formerly-rational Remainers couldn't stop themselves from reverting during Brexit. It's totally counterproductive and pointless.

Remain made some good points during Brexit, but the personal abuse could have cost them some vital votes.

logical_song said:

Sandpit said:

Is four years of having an idiot like Trump in charge, the price worth paying for getting the big money and lobbyists out of Washington? Discuss.

First, will it get big money and lobbyists out of Washington?
Second will it make it more likely that Russia will become more expansionist in say Ukraine and the Baltic States?
And that's just for starters.

The real irony is of course that Trump and Clinton are actually very similar. They are both based in New York, they are both social liberals in private although their rhetoric doesn't show it, they both have links to very questionable organisations, they are both old and suspected of hiding health problems, they have both been subject to police investigations, they have both used the 'birther' card against Obama and they have both made outrageous rhetorical statements on foreign policy in a bid to prop up their base, although in fairness I haven't yet heard of Trump threatening to use nuclear weapons against Mexico the way Clinton threatened to against Iran. Indeed, for many years the two of them seem to have been quite good friends.

They are both also very arrogant, very rude and clearly not possessed of high intelligence although both are also clearly above average. Not that that's necessarily a handicap - intellectually the Bushes were giants compared to most presidents of the 20th century (yes, really) and neither were (to put it mildly) great successes.

Moreover, whichever one gets in will surely face a very hostile Republican congress which will be out to block them at every turn. Given that Trump has zero experience of administration and Hilary's experience consists pretty much exclusively of a series of total and unmitigated fiascos (healthcare, Libya) we can expect a presidency where very little actually happens.

So this election probably boils down to whether you want a woman or a man in charge. Trump is helpfully making this easy for the Democrats by being a complete chauvinist, while Clinton is equally helpfully switching off moderate republicans by describing them in shall we say rather lurid terms.

Bluntly, the best way to make money on this election is probably to bet on a very low turnout as the party of 'they're all a bunch of scumbags' wins the vote handsomely. Any figure for under 60% should be free money, and anything for under 50% seems value.

Keegan's lost the plot:

Only 37% voted for a hard Brexit. For what does leaving the EU mean other than a hard Brexit? .....

I bet that a fair proportion of the 37% did not appreciate the implications of what they were doing. ......

How can a nation such as ours be so stupid? To coin a phrase, we need our country back. Our sovereign parliament must veto this absurd and self-destructive policy.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/02/corbynistas-may-have-majority-but-brexiters-dont?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_a-politics_b-gdnukpolitics

Sandpit said:

Morning. Does anyone think the intention to declare Article 50 early next year has been changed by yesterday's announcements? If not, then the 1/5 pays out in six months max and is good value, if it's going to be 18 months as TSE suggests then the time value of money goes against the bet.

What's the reason for thinking May intends to trigger early next year?

@Indigo

His name is not McMao.

It is Maodonnell.

That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.

Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.

Ee-I EE-I o.

May's statement that she won't wait for the German elections ( September ' 17 ) to trigger A50 is new in that it gives a time limit. It also neatly buts her extra time as August '17 in much later than the " early next year " we've all been fed to date. It's carefully crafted. She's extending her envelope on A50 under cover of giving a deadline for doing it.

JonathanD said:

JosiasJessop said:

My memory's slightly dodgy, but didn't someone on here suggest a GRB a way forward before the referendum?

Can anyone remember who it was?

A GRB was always the favoured way for quickly dealing with the interweaved EU and UK law. I think Hannan suggested it years ago. In the grand scheme of things its irrelevant to our relationship with the EU and says nothing about the likelihood of hard or soft Brexit.

It's a good dead cat however and will keep the bent banana and incandescent light bulb frothers distracted.

Thanks.

Must be my memory then, as I can only vaguely remember it being mentioned or discussed.

Ho hum.

PlatoSaid said:

I'm sure that won them over

Washington Examiner
Hillary Clinton referred to Sanders fans as frustrated basement-dwellers in newly revealed audio https://t.co/RX59okwYcO https://t.co/mv9M01tz67

Misleadingbheadlibe is misleading. You clearly didn't listen to the audio. At least you aren't posting fake quotes though.

Indigo said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

What should the Great Repeal Bill say? Simply that the 48% are all traitors & therefore it's legal to shoot them all dead. Or, have I misunderstood? If so, I', sure one or other of the Seans, or even Charles, can explain...

Christ on a bike. It means the 48% lost, the clue being in the number being smaller than 50% so the government has been mandated to follow the request of the 52% (they won, the number being bigger than 50%).

When Labour won the general election no one suggested it was time to shoot all the Tories (well maybe MacMao did), it was just time to do what Labour wanted for a while, and now for the same reasons it time to do what the Leavers want for while.

Its exactly the same as the bleating north of the border about 45% being nearly a win, and presumably if the referendum had been a little more decisive 35% would have been "nearly a win" as well. Sorry, you cant be a bit in the EU any more than you can be a bit pregnant.

Tories are always right about everything, aren't they? Other than that, I can't see any connection to what I wrote earlier.

@hugorifkind: The Great Repeal Bill is nonsense. It just says we'll do what we've already decided to do, eventually, one we've figured out how to do it.

ydoethur said:

@Indigo

His name is not McMao.

It is Maodonnell.

That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.

Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.

Ee-I EE-I o.

Old MaoDonnnell had a farm EIEIO
And on that farm he had no pigs EIEIO
Because it is a safe space for muslims EIEOO
And on that farm he had no cows EIEIO
Because the dairy industry is dependent on the veal trade EIEIO
But on that farm he had an arms cache EIEIO
To fight the British Imperialists EIEIO

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

He is the absolute caricature of everything that neopuritan liberal do gooder sanctimonious politically correct types like Clintonn loathe with every fibre of their being.

Which is why it will be so hilarious and good for democracy if he won. The people of the USA will have unequivocally given the finger to diversity and equality mongering safe spacing phobiaising multi culti taking offence hunting political correctness.

Whether he will actually be any good is something to worry about later. At least he wont be poking the bear (putin) with a stick, which makes us all safer.

foxinsoxuk said:

ydoethur said:

@Indigo

His name is not McMao.

It is Maodonnell.

That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.

Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.

Ee-I EE-I o.

Old MaoDonnnell had a farm EIEIO
And on that farm he had no pigs EIEIO
Because it is a safe space for muslims EIEOO
And on that farm he had no cows EIEIO
Because the dairy industry is dependent on the veal trade EIEIO
But on that farm he had an arms cache EIEIO
To fight the British Imperialists EIEIO

Ha, brilliant!

PlatoSaid said:

Frank Luntz
Apparently, @WikiLeaks will release Hillary stuff on Wednesday.

Tune into next week’s episode of America 2016! https://t.co/as9sWMOLPR

It's amazing how WikiLeaks only leaks things about the US, and then only *certain* people in the US.

It's almost as though they're not the great warrior for freedom and truth that they think they are ...

CarlottaVance said:

619 said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

anyone with any decency stopped supported him months ago. Its just scumbags now. Hopefully they are limited in number!

With all due respect - that is the sort of 'thinking' that won the referendum for REMAIN.

I think he's an obnoxious git - but he's tapped into the fears and concerns of those left behind by globalisation - and demonising them won't change their minds.

I've come to the conclusion that for some political campaigners, the only thing that matters is feeling good about oneself, and demonising one's opponents. Actually winning the campaign is irrelevant, indeed, they will pursue strategies that are counter-productive to winning, so long as the principal objective can be pursued.

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

He is the absolute caricature of everything that neopuritan liberal do gooder sanctimonious politically correct types like Clintonn loathe with every fibre of their being.

Which is why it will be so hilarious and good for democracy if he won. The people of the USA will have unequivocally given the finger to diversity and equality mongering safe spacing phobiaising multi culti taking offence hunting political correctness.

Whether he will actually be any good is something to worry about later. At least he wont be poking the bear (putin) with a stick, which makes us all safer.

Indeed. Calling his supporters deblorables and all the -isms isn't going to help attract floating voters either. Trump's an idiot but he is closer than the Hillary camp dare to admit.

The question is whether the same type of voters who unusually turned out to vote for Brexit, also turn out to vote for Trump.

Alistair said:

JosiasJessop said:

PlatoSaid said:

Frank Luntz
Apparently, @WikiLeaks will release Hillary stuff on Wednesday.

Tune into next week’s episode of America 2016! https://t.co/as9sWMOLPR

It's amazing how WikiLeaks only leaks things about the US, and then only *certain* people in the US.

It's almost as though they're not the great warrior for freedom and truth that they think they are ...

They leaked a bunch of Syria e-mails but accidentally left out one were Syrian officials discuss with a Russian bank moving vast quantities of cash out of the coubtry despite having all the other emails from that official on that day.

Amazing that.

I'm very angry with WikiLeaks and the Guardian - they've put a member of my family in somewhat of a difficult position.

Rusbridger and Leigh ought to be in jail over the 'accidental' publication of the password.

ydoethur said:

@Indigo

His name is not McMao.

It is Maodonnell.

That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.

Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.

Ee-I EE-I o.

Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?

CarlottaVance said:

Keegan's lost the plot:

Only 37% voted for a hard Brexit. For what does leaving the EU mean other than a hard Brexit? .....

I bet that a fair proportion of the 37% did not appreciate the implications of what they were doing. ......

How can a nation such as ours be so stupid? To coin a phrase, we need our country back. Our sovereign parliament must veto this absurd and self-destructive policy.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/oct/02/corbynistas-may-have-majority-but-brexiters-dont?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_a-politics_b-gdnukpolitics

For such an intelligent man, Keegan has remarkable difficulty understanding our electoral process.

Non-voters, and children, don't count towards the outcome.

https://twitter.com/st_newsroom/status/782485773123629056

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

ydoethur said:

@Indigo

His name is not McMao.

It is Maodonnell.

That sounds like the start of a song. But it obviously can't have a tune or meter as both are capitalist bourgeois constructs that we should never ever use.

Old Maodonnell had a farm. But that was far too bourgeois for him, so he collectivised it with innumerable other farms. This meant they could sit around talking high matters of politics all day and throwing stones at the sparrows, as a result of which the crops failed and they all starved.

Ee-I EE-I o.

Isn't that Mugabe not Maodonnell?

Mugabe didn't collectivise, he went on a land grab. I was thinking of Mao's disastrous collectivisation drive in the 1950s, which coupled with his anti-pest (sparrowcide) campaign and an unfortunate drought led to the deaths of around 60 million people.

But Dr Foxinsoxuk absolutely owned me on the lyrics front!

Paul_Bedfordshire said:

Dromedary said:

Why do you expect introducing the bill will coincide with invoking Article 50? What's the point in invoking Article 50 and then having the Commons, or indeed the Lords, vote the bill down?

Meanwhile, Trump has now physically mocked how Clinton stumbled and collapsed on 11 September owing to pneumonia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEmkIPfa6w8

Last year he mocked a reporter's arthrogryposis:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqtoUFW5svQ

He has also insulted those who suffer from super obesity, saying that the hacking into the DNC's computer, rather than being the work of Russian intelligence, might have been done by someone who weighs 400 pounds:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfVce4rELAY

Does anyone who isn't a gun nut headbanger have a good reason to support this guy? C'mon, Trump surrogates with any sense of what makes and doesn't make a decent human being, withdraw your backing in an organised way and call for this casino-bankrupting, tax-avoiding, embargo-breaking billionaire to resign his candidacy.

He is the absolute caricature of everything that neopuritan liberal do gooder sanctimonious politically correct types like Clintonn loathe with every fibre of their being.

Which is why it will be so hilarious and good for democracy if he won. The people of the USA will have unequivocally given the finger to diversity and equality mongering safe spacing phobiaising multi culti taking offence hunting political correctness.

Whether he will actually be any good is something to worry about later. At least he wont be poking the bear (putin) with a stick, which makes us all safer.

OK Paul, I get that you hate sanctimonious do gooder liberal stuff etc. But in reality much of that stuff is what I call simple respect for fellow human beings. I'm really interested in where you draw the line? What is the difference between sanctimonious do goodery and respect for fellow humans? Where does casual discrimination become unacceptable? Because the likes of Trump are taking us towards those boundaries and people like you are cheering it.

Is it fire up the quattro, back to the 70s! Or fire up the gas ovens, back to the 40s? Because it seems to me that once you're on it it's a mightily slippery slope.

OldKingCole said:

What happens if enough Tories vote against or rebel so that the GRB is defeated in the Commons?

I wondered this last night, one response was a general election.

JonathanD said:

Scott_P said:

@hugorifkind: The Great Repeal Bill is nonsense. It just says we'll do what we've already decided to do, eventually, one we've figured out how to do it.

Yes, its a dead cat - gives the impression of progress and decision making without actually requiring any. Osborne would be proud of the game playing.

Actually, no. We could have gone down the route of reviewing every piece of EU law in the next two years. This announcement has made it clear we aren't going to do that, instead EU law is simply to be transposed into UK law.

Sandpit said:

JosiasJessop said:

Alistair said:

JosiasJessop said:

PlatoSaid said:

Frank Luntz
Apparently, @WikiLeaks will release Hillary stuff on Wednesday.

Tune into next week’s episode of America 2016! https://t.co/as9sWMOLPR

It's amazing how WikiLeaks only leaks things about the US, and then only *certain* people in the US.

It's almost as though they're not the great warrior for freedom and truth that they think they are ...

They leaked a bunch of Syria e-mails but accidentally left out one were Syrian officials discuss with a Russian bank moving vast quantities of cash out of the coubtry despite having all the other emails from that official on that day.

Amazing that.

I'm very angry with WikiLeaks and the Guardian - they've put a member of my family in somewhat of a difficult position.

Rusbridger and Leigh ought to be in jail over the 'accidental' publication of the password.

Yes, those who published the password should be held accountable. Those who had the files made a good effort to run them through a journalistic process so as not to put anyone at risk. That those journalists then published the master password to the data dump is what actually exposed people.

I think it was deliberate and pre-arranged. Can't prove it, though.

At the very least it was gross incompetence.