politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump the Time magazine “Person of the Year” – it is hard to d
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trump the Time magazine “Person of the Year” – it is hard to disagree
Donald Trump is TIME's Person of the Year 2016 #TIMEPOY https://t.co/5pTGOksevE pic.twitter.com/N8BtqTu9Nl
Comments
-
-
Donald misunderstanding it's not necessarily an 'award' or just that he wants to be seen to be huuuge, regardless of whether it is for good or bad reasons?TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Big thank you to Paddy Power 1/2 when Shadsy was offering 1/50
-
FPT: Mr. Eagles, you can't discount the events of 2016 when looking at earlier concepts. It's like when RTD buggered up Who canon with the Time War or when the new trilogy threw out the Star Wars Expanded Universe.
Alas, poor Grand Admiral Thrawn.
On-topic: could make a case for Farage, given the EU vote and his intervention for Trump.0 -
Paddy was 1-2, Ladbrokes was 1-5.TheScreamingEagles said:Big thank you to Paddy Power 1/5 when Shadsy was offering 1/10
0 -
I can't help feeling that, had she won, Hillary would equally have been president of the 'Divided States of America', although I suspect that Time magazine would not have made the point.
I wonder whom they would have chosen if Hillary had won?0 -
The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.0 -
Yeah fixed now.Pulpstar said:
Paddy was 1-2, Ladbrokes was 1-5.TheScreamingEagles said:Big thank you to Paddy Power 1/5 when Shadsy was offering 1/10
0 -
So, how much was everyone able to get on
? 0 -
Hasn't every new POTUS in the last 40 years has won except George Bush Senior who lost out to the endangered Earth.Richard_Nabavi said:I can't help feeling that, had she won, Hillary would equally have been president of the 'Divided States of America', although I suspect that Time magazine would not have made the point.
I wonder whom they would have chosen if Hillary had won?0 -
She stands for bettering Germany, he stands for bettering the USA - they may both do good or bad jobs of it, and in very different styles, but I'm sure they can appreciate putting your country above all else.williamglenn said:
The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.
0 -
£20 in shop.Pulpstar said:So, how much was everyone able to get on
?0 -
Time - another sore loser with butthurt.0
-
Paddy allowed me the same as they allowed you.Pulpstar said:So, how much was everyone able to get on
?0 -
I meant, to use a term du jour, on the international plane. A lot of Eurosceptics are convinced that Trump hates the EU, simply on the basis that he was happy to associate himself with the Brexit vote. It ain't necessarily so.kle4 said:
She stands for bettering Germany, he stands for bettering the USA - they may both do good or bad jobs of it, and in very different styles, but I'm sure they can appreciate putting your country above all else.williamglenn said:
The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.0 -
Something like that, which is one reason why I was sure it would be Trump.TheScreamingEagles said:Hasn't every new POTUS in the last 40 years has won except George Bush Senior who lost out to the endangered Earth.
0 -
5...4...3...2...1....Trump tweets he hates the picture.0
-
Yay, 1/2 from yesterday comes in. Thanks Paddy!0
-
Keir Starmer: This motion does not give authority to trigger Article 50.0
-
Clinton will probably pass Obama's '12 vote total !
Trump's needle:
Margin/(Swing*2)
FL: 0.9%/2.1%
MI: 9.5%/9.7%
PA: 5.4%/6.1%
WI: 6.9%/7.7%0 -
Her, almost certainly. "Madam President".Richard_Nabavi said:I can't help feeling that, had she won, Hillary would equally have been president of the 'Divided States of America', although I suspect that Time magazine would not have made the point.
I wonder whom they would have chosen if Hillary had won?0 -
Anyway, time for me to be off. Cheers to Mr. Slackbladder for his comment on tax on the other thread (and Miss Plato).0
-
(but we will support that one too..)williamglenn said:Keir Starmer: This motion does not give authority to trigger Article 50.
0 -
Quick OT public service announcement.
If like me you keep chickens, ducks or other birds, even if only a few, please be aware that as of this morning there is now a country wide prevention zone in force across England. All birds must be kept under cover/indoors and separated from any possible contact with wild birds.
This is due to the very nasty (for birds) avian flu outbreak on the continent. It is not yet present in the UK but the fear is it is only a matter of time.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-measures-to-protect-poultry-against-avian-flu0 -
Basks in Trump sun-lamp rays.0
-
Careful you don't turn orange.PlatoSaid said:Basks in Trump sun-lamp rays.
0 -
@JoeWatts_: Tory MP Crispin Blunt just described the EU as "the enemy" #brexit0
-
Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.0
-
I resemble Pocahontas when tanned - my nickname as a kid as I'd plaits too. I even had a very Rachel Welch chamois leather dress back in the 80s....williamglenn said:
Careful you don't turn orange.PlatoSaid said:Basks in Trump sun-lamp rays.
0 -
There are degrees of division though. 2016 was certainly the most divisive in my lifetime. When was the last that was as bad? 1968 would be one contender? If not that, then which?dr_spyn said:Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.
0 -
2000, although that was due to the post vote situation.david_herdson said:
There are degrees of division though. 2016 was certainly the most divisive in my lifetime. When was the last that was as bad? 1968 would be one contender? If not that, then which?dr_spyn said:Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.
0 -
David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?0 -
david_herdson said:
There are degrees of division though. 2016 was certainly the most divisive in my lifetime. When was the last that was as bad? 1968 would be one contender? If not that, then which?dr_spyn said:Any presidential vote in The USA results in a divided state.
Goldwater 1964, hard to consider a more divisive candidate other than George Wallace. Ronald Reagan was almost portrayed as the devil incarnate, but as you say there are different degrees of division.0 -
re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2016/11/26/what-are-the-negotiating-aims-of-the-eu-27/
"The UK’s position is very easy to grasp for anyone who read the referendum ballot paper or has listened to the Prime Minister. The UK is going to leave the EU. There is no such thing as a single market we can remain in on leaving, and no-one on the Vote Leave campaign suggested there was. As the Uk wishes outside the EU to negotiate trade agreements with non EU countries we clearly will not be in the Customs union. The PM has ruled out EEA membership. This means there is not a lot to negotiate. We will not negotiate our independence with the rest of the EU – that is an absurd contradiction. We will offer them no new barriers to their trade with us, and I expect after a lot of huffing and puffing they will want to accept that offer. If they don’t we will trade with them as most favoured nation under WTO rules, and they will be the big losers on tariffs as a result."0 -
They did pick Adolf Hitler twice and Stalin also twice too, in 1938 the POTY was described as the greatest ever threat to democracy...TheScreamingEagles said:
0 -
I don't know what it means either.Stark_Dawning said:David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?0 -
That's put the cat amongst the pigeons
Paul Joseph Watson
Buzzfeed is close to becoming the left-wing Stormfront. https://t.co/8PGo1vaEr80 -
It means "Brexit".TheWhiteRabbit said:
I don't know what it means either.Stark_Dawning said:David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?
0 -
Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?
https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/806481461864001536
https://twitter.com/daily_politics/status/8064840870242631680 -
It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.TGOHF said:re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
0 -
Surely Hard Brexit means Hard Brexit means red, white and blue Brexit?Stark_Dawning said:David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?0 -
I don't see anything wrong in his position.TheScreamingEagles said:Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?
0 -
He was using the military metaphor that 'no plan survives intact first contact with the enemy'....Scott_P said:@JoeWatts_: Tory MP Crispin Blunt just described the EU as "the enemy" #brexit
Not the happiest of metaphors, but he didn't really call the EU 'the enemy'.....0 -
It's a decision only you can make, anything under ~ 18-1 you need a damned good reason to though. I've made an exception once on this general rule for Dr Fox @10-1, because he is a) Liam Fox and b) it was a free bet from the Sun.TheScreamingEagles said:Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?
Whats yr cumulative book on the contenders so far.
I am 25s Greening, 10s Fox.
I think adding too many feels a bit muggy.0 -
At least we know what colours it'll be.Stark_Dawning said:David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?0 -
Under what circumstances would the EU invoke tariffs on our car industry that wouldn't result in the mutual destruction of a multitude of their industries ?Richard_Nabavi said:
It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.TGOHF said:re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
Be realistic..0 -
Who said anything about tariffs?TGOHF said:
Under what circumstances would the EU invoke tariffs on our car industry that wouldn't result in the mutual destruction of a multitude of their industries ?Richard_Nabavi said:
It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.TGOHF said:re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
Be realistic..0 -
I think its definitely something we want to end up with, but I'm not sure the government pre-agreeing to it strengthens their negotiation hand with the EU. It might be a poor, potentially massively backfiring bargaining chip but a shown two of clubs on the table is inferior to one kept in hand.Richard_Nabavi said:
It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.TGOHF said:re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
0 -
I think I'm on Fox at 10/1 and Hammond at 25/1Pulpstar said:
It's a decision only you can make, anything under ~ 18-1 you need a damned good reason to though. I've made an exception once on this general rule for Dr Fox @10-1, because he is a) Liam Fox and b) it was a free bet from the Sun.TheScreamingEagles said:Should I take the 10/1 on Chris Grayling as next to leave the cabinet in light of the below?
Whats yr cumulative book on the contenders so far.
I am 25s Greening, 10s Fox.
I think adding too many feels a bit muggy.0 -
John Galliano Brexit as opposed to the softer Christian Dior Brexit.foxinsoxuk said:
Surely Hard Brexit means Hard Brexit means red, white and blue Brexit?Stark_Dawning said:David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?0 -
Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down
"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"
Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.0 -
Oh Lord, Louise Mensch is opining on the Supreme Court case0
-
As TGOHF point out, our EU friends will be just as keen as us not to wreck their car-industry supply-chains. The German car industry alone uses parts from over 100 UK manufacturing sites. So it could be a logical outcome, and one which could be presented to domestic audiences rather neatly:Pulpstar said:Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down
"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"
Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.
EU politicians: "See! We said no cherry-picking, and the UK is no longer in the Single Market! It is reduced to the status of Turkey!"
UK politicians: "See! We said we could protect out exporters, and this gives us tariff-free, zero paperwork access to the Single Market! And without having to concede control of our borders or submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ."
So there could be a basis of part of a deal there. Services would remain the big stumbling-block, of course.0 -
Even then, is that earlier drunken, anti-semite Galliano, or later cleaned-up, penitent JG?williamglenn said:
John Galliano Brexit as opposed to the softer Christian Dior Brexit.foxinsoxuk said:
Surely Hard Brexit means Hard Brexit means red, white and blue Brexit?Stark_Dawning said:David Davis: 'I don't know what "Hard Brexit" means'
Really?0 -
Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/0 -
https://twitter.com/LouiseMensch/status/806493370419998721TheScreamingEagles said:Oh Lord, Louise Mensch is opining on the Supreme Court case
0 -
The general rule of a good deal is that both parties agree it is a good deal.Richard_Nabavi said:
As TGOHF point out, our EU friends will be just as keen not to wreck their car-industry supply-chains. So it could be a logical outcome, and one which could be presented to domestic audiences rather neatly:Pulpstar said:Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down
"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"
Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.
EU politicians: "See! We said no cherry-picking, and the UK is no longer in the Single Market! It is reduced to the status of Turkey!"
UK politicians: "See! We said we could protect out exporters, and this gives us tariff-free, zero paperwork access to the Single Market! And without having to concede control of our borders or submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ."
So there could be a basis of part of a deal there. Services would remain the big stumbling-block, of course.
In practice I think trade in manufactured goods and agricultural produce will be tarrif and barrier free, but services and other parts will be outside the single market. Hard Brexit plus cars and food in other words.
0 -
No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)
It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.
0 -
Oh, goody, someone else confusing their opinion with the meaning of words.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
Would the UK remain a member of the European Union if we did this?
If "yes", it isn't Brexit.
If "no", it is Brexit.
Anything else is personal opinion and wasn't on the ballot paper.0 -
That's the whole point that a lot of people don't get - that specific details of desired outcomes from negotiations publicly stated in advance of them starting, is sending our troops into battle with one hand tied behind their back.Pulpstar said:
I think its definitely something we want to end up with, but I'm not sure the government pre-agreeing to it strengthens their negotiation hand with the EU. It might be a poor, potentially massively backfiring bargaining chip but a shown two of clubs on the table is inferior to one kept in hand.Richard_Nabavi said:
It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.TGOHF said:re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
0 -
-
That's certainly what would make sense. However, 'barrier-free' means customs union, otherwise you have to have customs checks, certificates of origin and all that dross. That's a pain if you're running a tight supply chain, or if you're a small company without the necessary customs-documentation expertise.foxinsoxuk said:In practice I think trade in manufactured goods and agricultural produce will be tarrif and barrier free, but services and other parts will be outside the single market. Hard Brexit plus cars and food in other words.
0 -
More handbags than an Hermès store.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Which will totally prove our point then, won't it?TOPPING said:
No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)
It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.0 -
Less realistic than a WWE boutTheuniondivvie said:
More handbags than an Hermès store.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Yep that was not one of the difficult ones was it?
Slightly more difficult, and relevant to the last thread, is the Supreme Court decision on Brexit. I was gainfully employed this morning and didn't see it but the chat at lunch was that Pannick got a bit of a doing this morning. Is there value in the government winning? Maybe there is.0 -
There is already precedent in the British Isles - the Channel Islands are in the Customs Union, but are not in the EU and have controls on immigration.....Andy_Cooke said:
Oh, goody, someone else confusing their opinion with the meaning of words.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
Would the UK remain a member of the European Union if we did this?
If "yes", it isn't Brexit.
If "no", it is Brexit.
Anything else is personal opinion and wasn't on the ballot paper.0 -
Yes, yes, yes, we know we shouldn't take him seriously or literally.williamglenn said:
The chemistry between Trump and Merkel will be fascinating.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's said far harsher things about people he's subsequently given jobs to so no-one should read into his tweets that he really is a convinced opponent of anything Merkel stands for.
One day someone will.........0 -
If Louise Mensch's opinion is that the Supreme Court should caption the barrister or judge speaking, and mute the microphones of everyone else (especially if they have a hacking cough) then she is entirely correct.TheScreamingEagles said:Oh Lord, Louise Mensch is opining on the Supreme Court case
0 -
Our being in the customs union is "bigger" to us than it is to Europe. Even if this isn't the case, you shouldn't explicitly state that you 'need' to be in it.Richard_Nabavi said:
As TGOHF point out, our EU friends will be just as keen as us not to wreck their car-industry supply-chains. The German car industry alone uses parts from over 100 UK manufacturing sites. So it could be a logical outcome, and one which could be presented to domestic audiences rather neatly:Pulpstar said:Or to put it another way, Verhofstadt (I think ?) sits down
"So you want to stay in the customs union, indeed need to do so to pass this through your parliament. What are you prepared to offer in return for that ?"
Laudable as it may be we don't want to hand all our 'twos' to strengthen the EU's hand.
EU politicians: "See! We said no cherry-picking, and the UK is no longer in the Single Market! It is reduced to the status of Turkey!"
UK politicians: "See! We said we could protect out exporters, and this gives us tariff-free, zero paperwork access to the Single Market! And without having to concede control of our borders or submit to the jurisdiction of the ECJ."
So there could be a basis of part of a deal there. Services would remain the big stumbling-block, of course.
All stems from Cameron's decision not to make the referendum legally binding anyhow...
Who was advising him on that ?0 -
Is that real? I mean is the North korean government really putiing that out.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Which of the judges was doing the doing ?DavidL said:Yep that was not one of the difficult ones was it?
Slightly more difficult, and relevant to the last thread, is the Supreme Court decision on Brexit. I was gainfully employed this morning and didn't see it but the chat at lunch was that Pannick got a bit of a doing this morning. Is there value in the government winning? Maybe there is.0 -
At what point, in the minds of some, did 'Brexit' become a synonym for 'Farageism'? It certainly wasn't during the campaign - in fact Leave were at great pains to assert that Farageism was merely a scare tactic of Project Fear. Yet, thereafter Farageism acquired the status of Leave orthodoxy. It would interesting to pinpoint where and how this came about.TOPPING said:
No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)
It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.0 -
@paulwaugh: IDS in Brexit motion debate: "I'd rather stay in [the EU], than stay in the Customs Union..."0
-
Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?0
-
In Farage's mind - while he was in his mama's womb. Of course.Stark_Dawning said:
At what point, in the minds of some, did 'Brexit' become a synonym for 'Farageism'? It certainly wasn't during the campaign - in fact Leave were at great pains to assert that Farageism was merely a scare tactic of Project Fear. Yet, thereafter Farageism acquired the status of Leave orthodoxy. It would interesting to pinpoint where and how this came about.TOPPING said:
No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)
It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.
0 -
No, a very funny spoof accountnunu said:
Is that real? I mean is the North korean government really putiing that out.TheScreamingEagles said:0 -
Not obvious to me either.Theuniondivvie said:Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?
0 -
How am I in the same party as IDS?0
-
Hmm...
"Boldly, JLR says the new TRANSCEND project, which is partly funded by the UK government, will help “rebuild the UK’s transmission production”. Jaguar Land Rover currently uses an eight-speed automatic gearbox supplied by German firm ZF; many of its manual gearboxes come from Germany’s Getrag."
"ULTRAN has been a three-year research initiative led by Jaguar Land Rover in a consortium including Ricardo, Tata Steel, Lubrizol, GRM Consulting Ltd, American Axle & Manufacturing and the Universities of Southampton, Newcastle and Warwick – with the support of the UK’s innovation agency, InnovateUK."
"GKN’s integrated electric drive system could transform the EV market. UK firm's integrated drive system produces up to 1475lb ft and will make production in 2019. The company that created the all-wheel drive systems of the BMW i8 and Porsche 918 has produced an innovative electric drive system that can produce up to 1475lb ft of torque."
I get the feeling that things are looking up for reshoring.0 -
Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.Theuniondivvie said:Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?
0 -
That Brexiters' strategy here also is have cake and eat it? YepLuckyguy1983 said:
Which will totally prove our point then, won't it?TOPPING said:
No single market no customs union or a large number of Brexiters will feel it is not their kind of Brexit.CarlottaVance said:Interestingly Thornberry committed Labour to staying inside the customs union—which would mean that the UK could not do any comprehensive free-trade deals post Brexit. Indeed, if Britain stays inside the customs union, it really won’t be Brexit in the proper sense of the word.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/12/pmqs-emily-thornberrys-battle-customs-union/
(They will be the same people of course who constantly whined about how it was "up to the government" to determine Brexit.)
It's fair game for the moderate bit of Labour to have a go at it.0 -
What's the FedEx arrow thing?AlastairMeeks said:
Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.Theuniondivvie said:Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?
Is it like Colonel Sanders' tie actually being little arms and legs?0 -
I'm not sure it is bigger to us. I agree that nothing should be conceded in advance, which is why Theresa May is right to try to suppress MP interference in the negotiations. Her mistake is to be taking too long over it - I think that she has a tendency to act as though the position is static, whereas in politics, as in war, your adversaries are always shifting around and may regroup before you've executed your plan.Pulpstar said:Our being in the customs union is "bigger" to us than it is to Europe. Even if this isn't the case, you shouldn't explicitly state that you 'need' to be in it.
0 -
Time to start a meme...TheScreamingEagles said:
Not obvious to me either.Theuniondivvie said:Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?
0 -
The 70% solution really is remaining!Scott_P said:@paulwaugh: IDS in Brexit motion debate: "I'd rather stay in [the EU], than stay in the Customs Union..."
0 -
-
They just give this title to anyone then.....
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html0 -
Look at the white space between the last E and the XTheScreamingEagles said:
What's the FedEx arrow thing?AlastairMeeks said:
Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.Theuniondivvie said:Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?
Is it like Colonel Sanders' tie actually being little arms and legs?
It makes a rightwards pointing arrow (and this is deliberate)
0 -
Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?0
-
Because being in a Customs Union would prohibit us from entering into free trade deals with other countries. IDS said that the US Congress has already produced preliminary legislation to enable a UK-US trade agreement.Scott_P said:@paulwaugh: IDS in Brexit motion debate: "I'd rather stay in [the EU], than stay in the Customs Union..."
0 -
Don't forget the 16 million traitorsPulpstar said:Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?
Something should be done about them, don't you think?
0 -
The Supreme Court can develop the law. So it is open to it to establish a new legal principle if it thinks appropriate. In a case as controversial as this, it would want to have a clear rationale for doing so.Pulpstar said:Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?
0 -
The Amazon smile from A->Z is also another can't under logo0
-
We're undeniably in a minority.Innocent_Abroad said:
Don't forget the 16 million traitorsPulpstar said:Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?
Something should be done about them, don't you think?
On tinder dry technical legal grounds we should win the case - but "justice" is the governments' potential out I feel. I have no idea if law trumps justice or vice versa though.
Edit: Alastair has answered my point eloquently below.0 -
AlastairMeeks said:
ThanksAndy_Cooke said:
Look at the white space between the last E and the XTheScreamingEagles said:
What's the FedEx arrow thing?AlastairMeeks said:
Like the FedEx arrow, once you see it you can't unsee it.Theuniondivvie said:Someone on Twitter just suggested that the M above the Don's napper resembles horns and Time are on the troll. Is it really obvious and are my visual sensibilities somewhat blunt today?
Is it like Colonel Sanders' tie actually being little arms and legs?
It makes a rightwards pointing arrow (and this is deliberate)0 -
Thanks, I was wondering why you thought the odds should be 4-6 / 6-4, I think that explains itAlastairMeeks said:
The Supreme Court can develop the law. So it is open to it to establish a new legal principle if it thinks appropriate. In a case as controversial as this, it would want to have a clear rationale for doing so.Pulpstar said:Question: If a Justice thinks Miller/Pannick is technically right in law, but the government with the backing of 17.4 million voters (Or NET 1-2 millionish if you prefer) is "naturally just" are they still obliged to rule in favour of Miller/Pannick ?
0 -
Umnmm: unfortunately, I don't think that's true. Because the auto industry has multi-country supply chains, cutting us 'out' would harm us far more than them. Simply, we don't have enough of an auto component industry in the UK.TGOHF said:
Under what circumstances would the EU invoke tariffs on our car industry that wouldn't result in the mutual destruction of a multitude of their industries ?Richard_Nabavi said:
It means that they, probably rightly, consider that the minor disadvantage of not being able to negotiate our own trade deals is outweighed by the humongous advantage of not wrecking our car industry.TGOHF said:re Labour's new customs union policy - does that mean they don't want new free trade deals with the rest of the world ?
Be realistic..0 -
The Amazon logo.0
