NOTTINGHAM, England, Oct 14 (Reuters) - Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said he was willing to allow inflation to run higher than the central bank's 2 percent target in order to help employment and allow Britain's economy to grow. Carney made the comment as he described the BoE's mission at the start of a public meeting in the central English city of Nottingham, one of several being held on Friday by senior BoE officials. British inflation is expected to rise above 2 percent in 2017 because of a sharp fall in the value of the pound following the country's decision to leave the European Union. The BoE has previously signalled it is likely to cut interest rates below their already historic low of 0.25 percent in order to help the economy cope with the shock of the Brexit vote. Its next announcement on rates is due on Nov. 3
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
I am.
Trump is a monster, an a-hole, a racist and a misogynist. Clinton is a criminal, a liar, profoundly corrupt, the living definition of a machine politician and represents the victory of the government of Goldman-Sachs, by Goldman-Sachs, for Goldman-Sachs. The US political system is utterly broken. There is no middle ground and the country seems divided into two irreconcilable camps.
If we get Clinton we get four more years of the same. The US will steepen its downward curve of relative power, influence and respect. The chances of military conflict with Russia will be a lot higher. Wall Street wins. Main Street keeps on getting it where it hurts. The establishment (a two party thing) entrenches its power.
If we get Trump we get all sorts of insanity. Mexican walls, free beer for hookers, an 'America first' foreign policy. Probably better relations with many countries. A charlatan presidency. But we'd also see the deep state and the political establishment get screwed. Maybe the FBI and the IRS and the CIA and the Fed will be forced to depoliticise and be less overtly partisan. We'd see some move towards an elite that served its people.
The USA is in for a shitty four years whoever wins - and I think either winning candidate faces a higher risk of assassination than any president ever. They are by a country mile the two shittiest candidates ever offered up to the US electorate.
I think the USA that would emerge from the systemic break of Trump would be better than the USA that emerges from an entrenched establishment if Clinton wins.
Thank you. I don't agree of course, but it is a rational position.
I don't think it any more rational than those Labour party members who voted Jezza to shake up the New Labour Spadocracy.
My house needs decorating and new carpets, so I will set it on fire...
Trump. Brexit. Corbyn.
All are revolutionary desires. Revolutions do tend to eat themselves though, as we see in all three cases.
Mr. Urquhart, just seen a clip of Thornberry being booed. I wouldn't worry, if I were here. Some of those booing probably have England flags in their windows, and the rest are white van men, like as not.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
I don't rate him bar his clear persuasion skills. I'm trying to drag PB away from the liberal snobbery - very few are pointing out why so many Americans are unhappy - they're just doing the Hillary/Remain thing of calling them thick racist/guns/Jesusland bigots.
It's so much more than that and the media are playing an enormous role like puppet masters. I'm really annoyed on their behalf.
I'd be jolly unhappy if my choice was Trump or Clinton. I'm not that impressed that GB might have May v Corbyn but I'm still hopeful that won't be the case.
The grimly amusing thing is that Trump says in public what Hillary says in private
You have yet to post any evidence of this.
OMG!!!! Do you have eyes? And an electronic interwebby device? And perhaps even watched anything I've posted here?
Your absurd handwaving is hilarious - do keep at it.
Your key piece of evidence (that Hilary referred to certain groups as never-do-wells along with a bunch of other racist stuff) - that you have posted multiple times IS A SPAM E-MAIL THAT HILLARY DIDN'T WRITE.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
Conservatives are too busy being both the government and the opposition, since everyone else who could be the opposition has either vacated the field or is irrelevant.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
Tory support is a mile wide and an inch thin. It's simply because there is a lack of viable alternative.
I think Leavers and Remainers instinctively understand this, and the fragility of Brexit, hence the continued ferocity of debate.
Baked Alaska The hoaxing @NYTimes blames a 19-year old black Trump supporter for "distorting the polls" , @LATimes quickly refutes claim #MAGA3X https://t.co/NyCy0UGhSh
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
One thing that never gets mentioned with those by elections is turnout.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
LOL. A 'source' that has, as he first picture caption: "New York Times’ Trump accuser lying Jessica Leeds"
Is that like the 'virgin Connie Swail' ?
Also, so what? Many people get to meet the VP, President (*), and all sorts of other people. It's hardly a smoking gun. And it's not as if her mother's the only accuser.
(*) A young woman I met in my local library over the summer had met the Obamas recently. I did not ask what claims she was to ask her mother to make in return.
LOL. A 'source' that has, as he first picture caption: "New York Times’ Trump accuser lying Jessica Leeds"
Is that like the 'virgin Connie Swail' ?
Also, so what? Many people get to meet the VP, President (*), and all sorts of other people. It's hardly a smoking gun. And it's not as if her mother's the only accuser.
(*) A young woman I met in my local library over the summer had met the Obamas recently. I did not ask what claims she was to ask her mother to make in return.
Maybe we should troll the SNP by turning their own logic against them. Parts of Scotland that vote to Remain in the UK will be allowed to if they wish.
Fine, just so long as London is free to Remain in the EU.
And we've been through this before too.
Time to move on Alastair, you're rehashing the old arguments. Arguments that you've lost.
There's a difference between "arguments I've lost" and "arguments you disagree with". In time all bar the malevolent cretins will realise what a cul de sac we have wandered into with the vote to Leave.
Fior now, we must pursue Brexit because the people have spoken. The implications of that vote for society and for Britain will continue to unfold. Whether there is a Britain left at the end of that process must be very open to doubt now.
If we do Leave, on 'hard' terms, and make a real success of it I wonder how long in time it will be before the Remain cretins realise that perhaps they were wrong.
If we do leave, on "hard" terms and make a hash of it, I wonder how long it will be before the Leaver Divas realise that perhaps they were wrong.
Or will they simply deny that any other route could have been better.
If the government makes a hash of it, we kick them out and elect a different one...
Ah. Gotcha. If our decision goes badly, we blame the Government. If it goes well, we praise ourselves.
To be fair, 'twas ever thus.
(Mind you, I wonder just how badly May would have to fuck things up for us to be willing to kick her out and replace her with Corbyn! Puts rather a limit on the concept, rather).
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
Ultimately, though, the negotiation is with the leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain. The text of a settlement will be put to the Council of Ministers, who will vote by QMV.
The only extent to which the EU gets a vote is that the parliament has to agree. And one would hope that the various groups would take their leads from their political masters.
Although there isn't any evidence that the leaders of of Germany, France, Italy and Spain think differently from EU officials on the need for a hard line against the UK. Donald Tusk as President of the European Council represents those leaders. The Council is the heads of government body within the EU.
The leaders of Germany, France, Italy and Spain face re-election. A recession caused by a mishandled Brexit would endanger their jobs, and probably be a greater existential threat to the EU than a more sensible negotiated agreement.
True. But the same applies to us - and more so! It hasn't stopped us aiming for a hard Brexit.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
Here is a very poor analogy.
You run an office and have a no smelly foods at desk policy, as a couple of employees have been known in the past for microwaving rather offensive fish curries and stinking out the office.
Most people are OK with this, but there are some who do really hanker after those fish curries.
One in particular decides that, actually, screw it, they'd rather quit if it means they can't enjoy their favourite lunch.
They do so, move to the neighbouring office and can be seen through the window, enjoying their fish curry.
FOM is a fish curry issue. From one perspective, pandering to UK demands would make everyone worse off, and even if the UK is seen to "enjoy" it outside the EU it makes the task of ensuring compliance internally tougher.
Sorry, my analogy is shite. But this is about a common good (FOM) which does not enjoy complete support and in fact tends to be maligned by groups with the worst instincts.
You can call this elitist or whatever, but perhaps need to consider where some of these countries have come from, and the responsibility these elites believe they have.
I have a number of friends in the USA, most of whom were or are military (USAAF). They find themselves in a real quandary in this election, because they don't like either candidate.
However, they will vote Trump or simply not vote at all rather then vote Hilary. There are three reasons for this:
1) Constitutional. She doesn't seem to care much for the rigidity of the constitution, and more importantly the separation of powers. They say this is demonstrated by the nature of presidential pardons made by Bill Clinton which had potential links to the Hilary New York campaign and to the Clinton foundation, as well as a strong and fairly well evidenced suspicion that certain gov't departments such as the IRS were used to attack political opponents.
They also suspect that the Gibson Guitar corp (Norlin) were targeted by the EPA for use of 'illegal wood' - but the shipments in question were never charged over (despite being permanently confiscated), and other guitar companies such as PRS and Fender were left alone despite using the same shipment and procurement firms in the EU. Norlin was the only open Republican at the last election in the industry. (they are all musicians)
They also worry about Obamacare - remembering that Clinton's failed healthcare plans wee even worse, and that she will use the Supreme court to forever change the landscape of the balance of State and Federal power to force these changes through, and that will never be undone.
2) Economically, Obamacare registers hugely, and they don't think that the current direction of travel should be continued upon. They still rankle at the loss of 'Hard Money' rather than the current ever expanding system of debt financing. (They weren't that happy with Bush on that either).
3) Foreign policy - they are fed up of a 'weak' America which draws lines in the sand and then takes the broom out to them and quietly erases them. They think that a militarily strong USA is vital to world peace (and these guys have nearly all served in hot wars, or their families have), and they see the Syria debacle and the resurgent Russia as being very much the fault of Kerry, Clinton and Obama.
They're holding their noses, but their reasons shouldn't be dismissed as non issues compared to the respective personal issues between the candidates (which they seemingly couldn't care less about).
Interesting, thanks.
I must admit that I'm finding this election really policy-free. In the past most (all?) Dem and Re candidates have made statements and policies on Space. As far as I'm aware, neither have done so this time.
I haven't seen any. But both do have 'policy' web sites. Trump's is a poor excuse for IT organisation though.
You run an office and have a no smelly foods at desk policy, as a couple of employees have been known in the past for microwaving rather offensive fish curries and stinking out the office.
Most people are OK with this, but there are some who do really hanker after those fish curries.
One in particular decides that, actually, screw it, they'd rather quit if it means they can't enjoy their favourite lunch.
They do so, move to the neighbouring office and can be seen through the window, enjoying their fish curry.
FOM is a fish curry issue. From one perspective, pandering to UK demands would make everyone worse off, and even if the UK is seen to "enjoy" it outside the EU it makes the task of ensuring compliance internally tougher.
Sorry, my analogy is shite. But this is about a common good (FOM) which does not enjoy complete support and in fact tends to be maligned by groups with the worst instincts.
You can call this elitist or whatever, but perhaps need to consider where some of these countries have come from, and the responsibility these elites believe they have.
In the pantheon of PB analogies this is either the best or the worst. I can't make up my mind yet!
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
It is not uncommon for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid-term.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?.
That's the bit I'd welcome being explained.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
Here is a very poor analogy.
You run an office and have a no smelly foods at desk policy, as a couple of employees have been known in the past for microwaving rather offensive fish curries and stinking out the office.
Most people are OK with this, but there are some who do really hanker after those fish curries.
One in particular decides that, actually, screw it, they'd rather quit if it means they can't enjoy their favourite lunch.
They do so, move to the neighbouring office and can be seen through the window, enjoying their fish curry.
FOM is a fish curry issue. From one perspective, pandering to UK demands would make everyone worse off, and even if the UK is seen to "enjoy" it outside the EU it makes the task of ensuring compliance internally tougher.
Sorry, my analogy is shite. But this is about a common good (FOM) which does not enjoy complete support and in fact tends to be maligned by groups with the worst instincts.
You can call this elitist or whatever, but perhaps need to consider where some of these countries have come from, and the responsibility these elites believe they have.
Maybe your analogy works better if it is all the people in the office who regularly have several beers and a fish curry prior to going to a rather good club on a Friday night. One person really hates fish curry, even though fish is good for them and they look better eating it than when on their previous somewhat unhealthy diet. So they leave and go to a nearby office. They'd still like to meet up with their old friends for beers and clubbing, though. What is wrong with that? Why would those ex-colleagues want to shun them?
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
It is not uncommon for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid-term.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
No. In fact, if I were a Lib Dem I would be returning to my constituency and preparing for government.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
It is not uncommon for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid-term.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
No. In fact, if I were a Lib Dem I would be returning to my constituency and preparing for government.
That's what they failed to do in 2010 with the pledges.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
Here is a very poor analogy.
You run an office and have a no smelly foods at desk policy, as a couple of employees have been known in the past for microwaving rather offensive fish curries and stinking out the office.
Most people are OK with this, but there are some who do really hanker after those fish curries.
One in particular decides that, actually, screw it, they'd rather quit if it means they can't enjoy their favourite lunch.
They do so, move to the neighbouring office and can be seen through the window, enjoying their fish curry.
FOM is a fish curry issue. From one perspective, pandering to UK demands would make everyone worse off, and even if the UK is seen to "enjoy" it outside the EU it makes the task of ensuring compliance internally tougher.
Sorry, my analogy is shite. But this is about a common good (FOM) which does not enjoy complete support and in fact tends to be maligned by groups with the worst instincts.
You can call this elitist or whatever, but perhaps need to consider where some of these countries have come from, and the responsibility these elites believe they have.
Maybe your analogy works better if it is all the people in the office who regularly have several beers and a fish curry prior to going to a rather good club on a Friday night. One person really hates fish curry, even though fish is good for them and they look better eating it than when on their previous somewhat unhealthy diet. So they leave and go to a nearby office. They'd still like to meet up with their old friends for beers and clubbing, though. What is wrong with that? Why would those ex-colleagues want to shun them?
Because they worry that being anti-fish is contagious and they're concerned about the health of the group as a whole.
Sorry again for my poor analogy. I agree talk of punishment is entirely self-defeating. But there is demented talk on both sides. Just this week, Gerarld Howarth - a former minister! - was calling for a trade war with Germany if necessary.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?.
That's the bit I'd welcome being explained.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
Perhaps, because it isn't a 'Benefit'?
Or it's a game theory analogy. With Free Movement, all benefit to a degree. If one member defects, that one member gains a greater benefit at the cost of all the others.
Baked Alaska The hoaxing @NYTimes blames a 19-year old black Trump supporter for "distorting the polls" , @LATimes quickly refutes claim #MAGA3X https://t.co/NyCy0UGhSh
People who understand polls know WTF is going on.
If you read the piece linked it turns out that the NYT piece is actually correct: The one young black Trump supporter is actually substantially moving their poll. However, they plead that the move caused by this one guy forgetting to fill in his survey is within the poll's margin of error. (ie he's not moving it by like 4%...)
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?.
That's the bit I'd welcome being explained.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
Perhaps, because it isn't a 'Benefit'?
It is not being punished. If I stop paying my Gym subs, they are not "punishing" me by no longer allowing me to use the facilities.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?.
That's the bit I'd welcome being explained.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
Perhaps, because it isn't a 'Benefit'?
To be a single market means having the same market regulations, having access to the same capital resources, and having access to the same labour force.
Market forces then mean salaries in richer countries and poorer countries will tend to converge unless employees have skills for which there is a market wide shortage.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?.
That's the bit I'd welcome being explained.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
Perhaps, because it isn't a 'Benefit'?
Or it's a game theory analogy. With Free Movement, all benefit to a degree. If one member defects, that one member gains a greater benefit at the cost of all the others.
Not entirely. Some people are benefiting from FoM to different degrees, for others it is to their detriment. Then one member wants some reasonable modifications to make it fair, but everyone else in the club picks on them and says no. So they leave.
There is a cost of the leaving to others, but only because they were unfairly benefiting in the 1st place.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
It is not uncommon for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid-term.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
Yes it is common for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid term but not at the same time to be 15% ahead in national polls .
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
It is not uncommon for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid-term.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
Yes it is common for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid term but not at the same time to be 15% ahead in national polls .
Weren't Labour that far ahead while they were losing grounds in the locals?
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
There is undoubtedly the kind of bad feeling on both sides that you get in messy breakups. Apart from that, you would hope that membership brings benefits that you don't get when you are not a member. The better analogy is membership of a golf club. Maybe you don't like the way the club is run or you can think of better things to do than turn out for a couple of hours in the rain and wind. So you leave.
The basic point, though, is that unless you are a member of the club you don't get to play golf. Some people seem to think you can turn up at the tee without paying your dues or following club rules.
I understand why the EU elite may want to make Brexit tough for us - pour ne pas encourager les autres. Is it wise though to make a potential enemy on their doorstep? The EU looks a lot like a prison to me these days.
I don't. Why would anyone else want to leave if the EU if such a good thing? If anything Britain leaving makes it easier for the rest of the EU to pursue a political project without a reluctant Britain. It should make it easier to have a friendly relationship with a good neighbour and work out different ways of co-operating which suit both sides rather than seeking to force a country into something it does not want.
The idea of punishment only makes sense if the concern is that the EU is not actually that attractive and, therefore, the only way of keeping it together is by making the alternative so very much worse.
Personally, if I want to persuade my staff to stay in my team I concentrate on making it as attractive as possible for them not by being utterly horrible to those who leave. Fear only works for so long.
Depends on whether your staff begin to undermine or otherwise harm your organisation.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?.
That's the bit I'd welcome being explained.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
Perhaps, because it isn't a 'Benefit'?
It is not being punished. If I stop paying my Gym subs, they are not "punishing" me by no longer allowing me to use the facilities.
Sure, but not all the gym members want to kick us off the team because we're the team scorer and best friends with the team captain. Some even understand why we want to stop paying for membership because there are cheaper gyms but don't want to say so publicly in case the management get upset.
Parliament is not required to take an opinion. I have already instructed the Government how to act. Parliament is a legislative, not executive, body.
Well, if it comes to that, the referendum was non-binding, so the government isn't required to take a blind bit of notice of your "instruction"!
Oh, dear. This nonsense again?
The government told Parliament that it would be binding, and Parliament didn't object.
The government then told the people that it would be binding.
Sorry no.
May has reserve power to exercise Article 50. But parliament has no obligation to respect the referendum. It would be politically "brave" but not illegal.
It would be politically bonkers, and counterproductive. Remember when we had a parliamentary vote on a prerogative matter over Tony and George's excellent adventure in Iraq, and what was the net effect of that? Operation bomb brown civilians turned into Operation bomb brown civilians now with fingerlickin' good parliamentary sauce, and there was some pompous waffle about how splendid a parliamentarian X or Y was. It made Blair even more self-righteous than he was to start with. There is nothing democratic about bending the rules to get some extra voting in, because democracy doesn't work unless you also have the rule of law. I would have thought the more intelligent position for anti brexiters was "you brexit, you own it, so you exercise the prerogative if you think you're 'ard enough."
Baked Alaska The hoaxing @NYTimes blames a 19-year old black Trump supporter for "distorting the polls" , @LATimes quickly refutes claim #MAGA3X https://t.co/NyCy0UGhSh
People who understand polls know WTF is going on.
If you read the piece linked it turns out that the NYT piece is actually correct: The one young black Trump supporter is actually substantially moving their poll. However, they plead that the move caused by this one guy forgetting to fill in his survey is within the poll's margin of error. (ie he's not moving it by like 4%...)
IIRC that one polled person shifted the result by 1%. There were several other similar anomolies that combined to make the LATimes a rather noticeable outlier. A 6-7% difference is huge in this context.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
It is always possible to pick off individual council seats with a special effort and a focus on a local issue or two. What the Lib Dems and other minority parties can't do is a special effort all over the country.
UKIP have come closest when they won the biggest number of MEP seats with a surge across the whole country.
The Lib Dems need to set out to the country as a whole what they stand for and why this is distinctive from Conservative or Labour.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
Tory support is a mile wide and an inch thin. It's simply because there is a lack of viable alternative.
I think Leavers and Remainers instinctively understand this, and the fragility of Brexit, hence the continued ferocity of debate.
Yes, I would think that's very fair. At the moment there's nobody other than the Conservatives that I could consider - Corbyn is ridiculous, the Lib Dems don't want my vote, and UKIP are irrelevant provided that the referendum result is delivered. The only other people who stood in my constituency last year were TUSC.
If a centre-left party developed that accepted the referendum result and was committed to delivering on it, I'd give them a long hard look. No sign of that, though.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
There is undoubtedly the kind of bad feeling on both sides that you get in messy breakups. Apart from that, you would hope that membership brings benefits that you don't get when you are not a member. The better analogy is membership of a golf club. Maybe you don't like the way the club is run or you can think of better things to do than turn out for a couple of hours in the rain and wind. So you leave.
The basic point, though, is that unless you are a member of the club you don't get to play golf. Some people seem to think you can turn up at the tee without paying your dues or following club rules.
But they want us to pay full dues, even if we want to pay and play a few rounds of golf. Then they want to dock our score each time to punish us for not being full members. Your analogy does not hold.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
There is undoubtedly the kind of bad feeling on both sides that you get in messy breakups. Apart from that, you would hope that membership brings benefits that you don't get when you are not a member. The better analogy is membership of a golf club. Maybe you don't like the way the club is run or you can think of better things to do than turn out for a couple of hours in the rain and wind. So you leave.
The basic point, though, is that unless you are a member of the club you don't get to play golf. Some people seem to think you can turn up at the tee without paying your dues or following club rules.
The problem with the EU is that it's not a golf club, your membership of a golf club starts and ends in the clubhouse, once you're out and on the way home it doesn't effect the rest of your life, beyond paying for membership. If you want to use that analogy, then the EU golf club rules state that members will be allowed to stay over at each others houses indefinitely and not make any contributions while they are there. Most members choose to make a contribution to the running of the household, but recently the club chose, against the advice of some longer standing members, to admit unsuitable golfers who don't really play golf but just want the use of the other members houses.
''There is undoubtedly the kind of bad feeling on both sides that you get in messy breakups.''
I don;t see much bad feeling on our side, really. Europe's top politicians are taking it in turns to snipe at us, but there isn't much reply from elected politicians. We are taking plenty on the chin.
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
There is undoubtedly the kind of bad feeling on both sides that you get in messy breakups. Apart from that, you would hope that membership brings benefits that you don't get when you are not a member. The better analogy is membership of a golf club. Maybe you don't like the way the club is run or you can think of better things to do than turn out for a couple of hours in the rain and wind. So you leave.
The basic point, though, is that unless you are a member of the club you don't get to play golf. Some people seem to think you can turn up at the tee without paying your dues or following club rules.
But they want us to pay full dues, even if we want to pay and play a few rounds of golf. Then they want to dock our score each time to punish us for not being full members. Your analogy does not hold.
Maybe correct on the first point. The issue is less the dues than following club rules. Most clubs would expect their rules to be followed even by casual players. The second point doesn't make sense to me.
It's amazing: they set the whole thing up four years ago!
Staying moored to reality (aka retaining a small degree of scepticism regarding one's own beliefs) is becoming unfashionable.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/10/hes-different-like-a-drunk-uncle-my-us-election-focus-groups-in-philadelphia/ These theories had become one of the most worrying aspects of the campaign. “You have the dark fever-swamps of the right. I am a right-wing talk-show host but there are some serious fever swamps out there, and they traffic in the most bizarre conspiracy theories. And they’re difficult to refute because too many conservative commentators do not want to challenge them. They know that their audiences will believe them.” And the really disturbing thing was that “Donald Trump will see something, some bizarre, unfounded conspiracy theory. And you’re tempted to dismiss is as too far out of the mainstream, and the next thing, Donald Trump, who may be the next president of the United States, is tweeting out links to these kinds of things… How do you deal with somebody who actually doesn’t seem to have a filter, what is true what is false, what is responsible, what is irresponsible?”
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
What we don't know is whether the by-elections are affected by disproportionate effort. For example, are the Lib Dems far more motivated as a party to campaign in Little Dinnington-under-the-copse South than the Tories, to the extent that they'll flood the place with activists and leaflets, in a way that they won't be able to replicate at a scheduled local election where all wards are contested simultaneously, or over a whole constituency (never mind the country).
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
Yup, tiny.
not compared to an opinion poll of fewer than 2,000
In what way does Britain freely exercising its democratic vote to leave undermine or harm the EU?
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
There is undoubtedly the kind of bad feeling on both sides that you get in messy breakups. Apart from that, you would hope that membership brings benefits that you don't get when you are not a member. The better analogy is membership of a golf club. Maybe you don't like the way the club is run or you can think of better things to do than turn out for a couple of hours in the rain and wind. So you leave.
The basic point, though, is that unless you are a member of the club you don't get to play golf. Some people seem to think you can turn up at the tee without paying your dues or following club rules.
The problem with the EU is that it's not a golf club, your membership of a golf club starts and ends in the clubhouse, once you're out and on the way home it doesn't effect the rest of your life, beyond paying for membership. If you want to use that analogy, then the EU golf club rules state that members will be allowed to stay over at each others houses indefinitely and not make any contributions while they are there. Most members choose to make a contribution to the running of the household, but recently the club chose, against the advice of some longer standing members, to admit unsuitable golfers who don't really play golf but just want the use of the other members houses.
The staying over in houses bit adds unnecessary complication. The point is that shared sovereignty comes with limited constraints on your freedom to do things. The same applies to golf clubs and the EU and most international bodies. When I say limited, this does also apply to the EU's constraints on national parliaments and courts. I think it's quite reasonable for people to say the limits are way too intrusive and I want out. Nevertheless the point remains that benefits accrue from pooling your sovereignty. Those benefits will disappear once you stop pooling your sovereignty.
''Yes it is common for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid term but not at the same time to be 15% ahead in national polls.''
In real elections the tories are consistently under performing their poll score.
In real elections, the country isn't at risk of letting Corbyn into No 10 (for the moment). I accept that this means that the Tories aren't as popular as the VI polls suggest; that's right - they're not.
Just for a minute between describing books for my soon to be published thematic 'women' catalogue, I had an idle thought - if PB posts were voted on like reddit, would sense rise to the top....
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
Yup, tiny.
not compared to an opinion poll of fewer than 2,000
If it were just one opinion poll, I might agree with you.
But it isn't. It is all the opinion polls since the election, barring I think one, putting the Tories on a huge number and the LDs on a measly low one.
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
There are still many Trumpers on PB.
Plato Taffys William Glenn Paul Bedfordshire
There are more...
I'd definitely vote for him if I lived in the USA - despite being a Cruz supporter in the primaries. Mostly for a better range of Supreme Court appointments.
The U.K.’s exit negotiations with the European Union will be controlled by a select group of 12 ministers that includes all of the most Euroskeptic members of Theresa May’s cabinet, a further sign that the premier may be planning a clean break with the EU.
The committee will “oversee the negotiations on the withdrawal from the European Union and formation of a new relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union; and policy on international trade,” according to an unpublished U.K. government document obtained by Bloomberg.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
What we don't know is whether the by-elections are affected by disproportionate effort. For example, are the Lib Dems far more motivated as a party to campaign in Little Dinnington-under-the-copse South than the Tories, to the extent that they'll flood the place with activists and leaflets, in a way that they won't be able to replicate at a scheduled local election where all wards are contested simultaneously, or over a whole constituency (never mind the country).
And, as someone said up-thread, turnout. I am not convinced that a few hundred people voting in a council by-election tells us much about what would happen in a GE in the constituency.
The staying over in houses bit adds unnecessary complication. The point is that shared sovereignty comes with limited constraints on your freedom to do things. The same applies to golf clubs and the EU and most international bodies. When I say limited, this does also apply to the EU's constraints on national parliaments and courts. I think it's quite reasonable for people to say the limits are way too intrusive and I want out. Nevertheless the point remains that benefits accrue from pooling your sovereignty. Those benefits will disappear once you stop pooling your sovereignty.
But that's what the EU is, free movement is, in a certain sense, staying over at other members houses. One of the reasons we left was because free movement has become untenable for the UK (and Germany judging by their action on EU migrant benefits). You want to call the EU a pooling of sovereignty for trade, but it is far more than that. You don't want to ever engage in that discussion because EUphiles are so wedded to "the project" that any criticism is either brushed off as irrelevant or the people criticising are called racists, idiots or worse.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
It is not uncommon for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid-term.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
Yes it is common for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid term but not at the same time to be 15% ahead in national polls .
Weren't Labour that far ahead while they were losing grounds in the locals?
In the late 1990s, yes. Some of that was down to the fact that the Tories were recovering from their lowest local government performances ever in 1994-6 but not all of it. The 1998-2000 local election rounds were fairly positive for the Tories in absolute terms as well as in gains, despite being miles behind in the polls. We know what happened come 2001 though.
Anecdotes ... I've noticed the locals around here in the NW who voted Remain are fairly relaxed about leaving now. It's the Londoners who still seethe with anger and loss. I wonder if we ought to let them split off for the sake of their mental health. They can't deal with being thwarted and the consequent loss of their own prestige.
It's like dealing with seven-year-olds, so we ought to more understanding, but you feel like a spell on the naughty step would do them some good.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
Anecdotes ... I've noticed the locals around here in the NW who voted Remain are fairly relaxed about leaving now. It's the Londoners who still seethe with anger and loss. I wonder if we ought to let them split off for the sake of their mental health. They can't deal with being thwarted and the consequent loss of their own prestige.
It's like dealing with seven-year-olds, so we ought to more understanding, but you feel like a spell on the naughty step would do them some good.
I guess everyone they know voted Remain, or at least they think they did, which is unlikely to be the case for someone in the NW.
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
What we don't know is whether the by-elections are affected by disproportionate effort. For example, are the Lib Dems far more motivated as a party to campaign in Little Dinnington-under-the-copse South than the Tories, to the extent that they'll flood the place with activists and leaflets, in a way that they won't be able to replicate at a scheduled local election where all wards are contested simultaneously, or over a whole constituency (never mind the country).
And, as someone said up-thread, turnout. I am not convinced that a few hundred people voting in a council by-election tells us much about what would happen in a GE in the constituency.
True. If, as someone else said upthread, Tory support is a mile wide and an inch deep (both exaggerations but both contain some truth), then the vote shares in a 20% turnout local by-election will be quite different from a 70% turnout GE.
Remain ...Londoners who still seethe with anger and loss. I wonder if we ought to let them split off for the sake of their mental health. They can't deal with being thwarted and the consequent loss of their own prestige. It's like dealing with seven-year-olds, so we ought to more understanding, but you feel like a spell on the naughty step would do them some good.
The U.K.’s exit negotiations with the European Union will be controlled by a select group of 12 ministers that includes all of the most Euroskeptic members of Theresa May’s cabinet, a further sign that the premier may be planning a clean break with the EU.
The committee will “oversee the negotiations on the withdrawal from the European Union and formation of a new relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union; and policy on international trade,” according to an unpublished U.K. government document obtained by Bloomberg.
Part of me thinks this, done quickly, would be better for the country in the long run than a tortuous negotiation. The long-term uncertainty might hurt us more than the actual exit ...
Golly, Cernovich has 140m Twitter views a month. I'm amazed he hasn't been banned yet. They shadow banned Scott Adams last week until they were shamed out of it.
What is it with you and Trump, Plato? Genuinely interested. I didn't expect many regulars to be beating his particularly wee drum.
She can't help it.
She's a Trumpette involuntary.
I have made fun of Plato, but actually is she even still supporting Trump or just posting pieces of counter-narrative?
Plato - are you actually still supporting him? Is *anyone* on PB still supporting him?
There are still many Trumpers on PB.
Plato Taffys William Glenn Paul Bedfordshire
There are more...
I'd definitely vote for him if I lived in the USA - despite being a Cruz supporter in the primaries. Mostly for a better range of Supreme Court appointments.
Can't shame me on this - it's a culture war. If Hillary wins - she gives 30m illegals the vote and tilts the election base for generations in her favour.
And open borders - oh... what does that do bar growing the welfare base that vote Democrat - this is power play on a macro level. It's Tony v2.0
OGH also not happy - tweeting like crazy about the LDs winning 'real' elections.
Yes it is strange that in real elections , the Conservative vote is down everywhere . Ah you say but these are only local elections held in October . And yet local elections held in the spring , last October and previous Octobers when Cameron was leader showed Conservatives quite willing to vote in local elections when national polls were much less favourable .
You don't want to listen to my rather useful local info on the Broadstone seat. You want it to be a sign of LD resurgence.
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
No I am not interested in your excuses why one particular result was bad for the Conservatives . What is your excuse for all the local election results being universally bad compared to those held when Cameron was leader ?
Universally bad. Guffaw.
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
The tiny sample size will be around 150 by the end of this month with around 200,000 votes cast .
Yup, tiny.
not compared to an opinion poll of fewer than 2,000
And yet when you look at elections with much larger voter bases the Lib Dems do badly. -Down to one member of the London Assembly and overtaken by UKIP -Down to one Assembly member in Wales and loss of party status -Stands still in Scotland -Only gained back this year 44 Councillors out of the 280 Councillors lost in the same elections in 2012
Comments
NOTTINGHAM, England, Oct 14 (Reuters) - Bank of England Governor Mark Carney said he was willing to allow inflation to run higher than the central bank's 2 percent target in order to help employment and allow Britain's economy to grow.
Carney made the comment as he described the BoE's mission at the start of a public meeting in the central English city of Nottingham, one of several being held on Friday by senior BoE officials.
British inflation is expected to rise above 2 percent in 2017 because of a sharp fall in the value of the pound following the country's decision to leave the European Union.
The BoE has previously signalled it is likely to cut interest rates below their already historic low of 0.25 percent in order to help the economy cope with the shock of the Brexit vote. Its next announcement on rates is due on Nov. 3
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3837937/Bank-Englands-Carney-willing-tolerate-inflation-overshoot.html
Brexit.
Corbyn.
All are revolutionary desires. Revolutions do tend to eat themselves though, as we see in all three cases.
Edited extra bit: *her.
You posted this link: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/wikileaks-bombshell-racist-hillary-trashes-african-americans-calls-losers/
I posted the actual wikilekas e-mail: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1637
The sender of the e-mail is: orca100@upcmail.nl
Are you arguing, @PlatoSaid , that orca100 is a secret Hilary Clinton e-mail address?
It's simply because there is a lack of viable alternative.
I think Leavers and Remainers instinctively understand this, and the fragility of Brexit, hence the continued ferocity of debate.
BREAKING: @NYTimes Trump Accuser #JessicaLeeds's Daughter Had VIP Meeting With @VP @JoeBiden In 2012 https://t.co/8kXZQ08FdB
Baked Alaska
The hoaxing @NYTimes blames a 19-year old black Trump supporter for "distorting the polls" , @LATimes quickly refutes claim #MAGA3X https://t.co/NyCy0UGhSh
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/gop-insiders-outlook-for-trump-is-grim-229765
And if that were a real risk wouldn't you do rather more to make it attractive to stay?
Burning your bridges is rarely a sensible policy. That applies to both the EU and Britain. Talk of "punishment" is as silly as those in this country who hope the EU will crash and burn and that we should help bring that about. It may not be for us. That doesn't stop it being worthwhile for others.
Is that like the 'virgin Connie Swail' ?
Also, so what? Many people get to meet the VP, President (*), and all sorts of other people. It's hardly a smoking gun. And it's not as if her mother's the only accuser.
(*) A young woman I met in my local library over the summer had met the Obamas recently. I did not ask what claims she was to ask her mother to make in return.
For a candidate that's supposedly well ahead - the Dems aren't acting like it and their candidate is invisible.
To be fair, 'twas ever thus.
(Mind you, I wonder just how badly May would have to fuck things up for us to be willing to kick her out and replace her with Corbyn! Puts rather a limit on the concept, rather).
Clue no 1046 as to why it is not: few people even know for sure the name of the LD leader.
You run an office and have a no smelly foods at desk policy, as a couple of employees have been known in the past for microwaving rather offensive fish curries and stinking out the office.
Most people are OK with this, but there are some who do really hanker after those fish curries.
One in particular decides that, actually, screw it, they'd rather quit if it means they can't enjoy their favourite lunch.
They do so, move to the neighbouring office and can be seen through the window, enjoying their fish curry.
FOM is a fish curry issue.
From one perspective, pandering to UK demands would make everyone worse off, and even if the UK is seen to "enjoy" it outside the EU it makes the task of ensuring compliance internally tougher.
Sorry, my analogy is shite. But this is about a common good (FOM) which does not enjoy complete support and in fact tends to be maligned by groups with the worst instincts.
You can call this elitist or whatever, but perhaps need to consider where some of these countries have come from, and the responsibility these elites believe they have.
Labour consistently lost ground in local elections for thirteen years after 1997, but they still won two general elections during that period.
The Conservatives hold 43% of local council seats, the Lib Dems hold 9%. It would be amazing if the Conservatives were not incurring losses.
If Free Movement is a 'Benefit' of membership - why does giving up this 'benefit' lead to calls for us to be 'punished'?
Perhaps, because it isn't a 'Benefit'?
I am sure Plato is not a strumpet though.
That's what they failed to do in 2010 with the pledges.
Sorry again for my poor analogy. I agree talk of punishment is entirely self-defeating. But there is demented talk on both sides. Just this week, Gerarld Howarth - a former minister! - was calling for a trade war with Germany if necessary.
With Free Movement, all benefit to a degree. If one member defects, that one member gains a greater benefit at the cost of all the others.
If you read the piece linked it turns out that the NYT piece is actually correct: The one young black Trump supporter is actually substantially moving their poll. However, they plead that the move caused by this one guy forgetting to fill in his survey is within the poll's margin of error. (ie he's not moving it by like 4%...)
Colonel Bucket for Whatever
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UA-imoOWvjQ
(Like on BA)
We've had a tiny sample size.
And these are insignificant elections. For example, the Tories have a whopping majority on Poole council.....
No-one is underestimating that LDs are recovering some local election ground. But everyone ought to realise that nationally they're now almost an insignificance.
It might take 25 years before they get up to 50 seats again.
To be a single market means having the same market regulations, having access to the same capital resources, and having access to the same labour force.
Market forces then mean salaries in richer countries and poorer countries will tend to converge unless employees have skills for which there is a market wide shortage.
Not entirely. Some people are benefiting from FoM to different degrees, for others it is to their detriment. Then one member wants some reasonable modifications to make it fair, but everyone else in the club picks on them and says no. So they leave.
There is a cost of the leaving to others, but only because they were unfairly benefiting in the 1st place.
The basic point, though, is that unless you are a member of the club you don't get to play golf. Some people seem to think you can turn up at the tee without paying your dues or following club rules.
It is always possible to pick off individual council seats with a special effort and a focus on a local issue or two. What the Lib Dems and other minority parties can't do is a special effort all over the country.
UKIP have come closest when they won the biggest number of MEP seats with a surge across the whole country.
The Lib Dems need to set out to the country as a whole what they stand for and why this is distinctive from Conservative or Labour.
In real elections the tories are consistently under performing their poll score.
If a centre-left party developed that accepted the referendum result and was committed to delivering on it, I'd give them a long hard look. No sign of that, though.
But they want us to pay full dues, even if we want to pay and play a few rounds of golf. Then they want to dock our score each time to punish us for not being full members. Your analogy does not hold.
I don;t see much bad feeling on our side, really. Europe's top politicians are taking it in turns to snipe at us, but there isn't much reply from elected politicians. We are taking plenty on the chin.
:-)
London Zoo gorilla recaptured after he realises how much he'd have to pay to rent similar size space in zone 1 in London.
REQUIRED READING. Thanks for posting Jack. Amid the lizardly bilge on here, this is still a great site for links and analysis.
Re: the piece itself. There's no better insight into an election than inside interviews with executives from the losing side. Great journalism.
Having read it, I am now almost certain that my drunken bet on Trump last night will, thankfully, be a loser.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/10/hes-different-like-a-drunk-uncle-my-us-election-focus-groups-in-philadelphia/
These theories had become one of the most worrying aspects of the campaign. “You have the dark fever-swamps of the right. I am a right-wing talk-show host but there are some serious fever swamps out there, and they traffic in the most bizarre conspiracy theories. And they’re difficult to refute because too many conservative commentators do not want to challenge them. They know that their audiences will believe them.” And the really disturbing thing was that “Donald Trump will see something, some bizarre, unfounded conspiracy theory. And you’re tempted to dismiss is as too far out of the mainstream, and the next thing, Donald Trump, who may be the next president of the United States, is tweeting out links to these kinds of things… How do you deal with somebody who actually doesn’t seem to have a filter, what is true what is false, what is responsible, what is irresponsible?”
Yesterday it was a marriage, now it's a golf club! Down below there was something about an office and smelly food.
The amount of insight we get from these absurd comparisons is approaching zero.
....and malc's diatribes sink to the bottom?
But it isn't. It is all the opinion polls since the election, barring I think one, putting the Tories on a huge number and the LDs on a measly low one.
Mostly for a better range of Supreme Court appointments.
The U.K.’s exit negotiations with the European Union will be controlled by a select group of 12 ministers that includes all of the most Euroskeptic members of Theresa May’s cabinet, a further sign that the premier may be planning a clean break with the EU.
The committee will “oversee the negotiations on the withdrawal from the European Union and formation of a new relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union; and policy on international trade,” according to an unpublished U.K. government document obtained by Bloomberg.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-14/u-k-s-may-loads-team-for-eu-talks-with-pro-brexit-ministers
It's like dealing with seven-year-olds, so we ought to more understanding, but you feel like a spell on the naughty step would do them some good.
'Yes it is common for governments to lose ground in local elections in mid term but not at the same time to be 15% ahead in national polls '
And yet when you look at elections with much larger voter bases the Lib Dems do badly.
-Down to one member of the London Assembly and overtaken by UKIP
-Down to one Assembly member in Wales and loss of party status
-Stands still in Scotland
-Only gained back this year 44 Councillors out of the 280 Councillors lost in the same elections in 2012
(Or perhaps not).
And open borders - oh... what does that do bar growing the welfare base that vote Democrat - this is power play on a macro level. It's Tony v2.0